United States v. Andrew Moorehead

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting the appellant's argument that government attempts to have Rule 41(b) amended demonstrated knowledge of the NIT warrant's illegality
• “But reasonable jurists have come to different conclusions about whether the NIT Warrant was valid. We cannot, therefore, expect officers to have known that this type of warrant was invalid at the time it 48 Case: 17-14915 Date Filed: 08/28/2019 Page: 49 of 56 was sought.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. Andrew Moorehead

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• United States v. Andrew Moorehead
  Sixth Circuit· 2019-01-09