United States v. Cyrus Jonathan George

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that “one does not have, a reasonable expectation of privacy in the visible exterior parts of an automobile that travels the public roads and highways”
• “By definition, de novo review entails consideration of an issue as if it had not been decided previously.”
• “By definition, de novo review entails consideration of an issue as if it had not been decided previously.”
• district court must consider all arguments, regardless of whether they were raised before the magistrate judge
• “The Supreme Court has repeatedly refused to recognize a legitimate Fourth Amendment privacy interest in those parts of an automobile[] . . . that are visible from [the] outside.”
• “{T]he court. . . shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).