Seohnlein v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that section 2518(1)(c) necessity requirement satisfied when normal investigative procedures failed to reveal scope of conspiracy and all persons involved
• holding that section 2518(l)(c) necessity requirement satisfied when normal investigative procedures failed to reveal scope of conspiracy and all persons involved
• noting that, while the affidavit included stale information, “this information [wa]s provided as mere background, and its presence does not taint more recent information in the affidavit”
• “to have a legitimate expectation of privacy by way of a possessory interest, defendant must have possession of the vehicle and the keys.”
• “[T]o have a legitimate expectation of privacy by way of a possessory interest, defendant must have possession of the vehicle and the keys.”
• “The government is simply not required to use a wiretap only as a last resort.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).