United States v. Alion Andersson, United States of America v. Charles W. Hinck

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the rough notes in that case \fall within the Bernard rule\
• noting that the rough notes in that case \fall within the Bernard rule\
• upholding search of closed suitcase that was on the bed next to arrestee
• “Law enforcement officers may testify concerning the techniques and methods used by criminals.”
• court upheld admission of expert testimony that defendants engaged in “counter-surveillance techniques”
• A defendant \has no legitimate expectation of finality in the original sentence when he has placed those sentences in issue by direct appeal and has not completed serving a valid sentence.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).