Skip to main content
· 5/15/1992

United States v. Delores Homick, United States of America v. Charles Dietz

Citations

  • 964 F.2d 899
  • 92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4140
  • 92 Daily Journal DAR 6521
  • 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 10364

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 interception of \even a relatively high percentage of nonpertinent calls is an inaccurate indicator of whether or not the government complied with the minimization requirement\
  • noting that the interception of “even a relatively high percentage of nonpertinent calls is an inaccurate indicator of whether or not the government complied with the minimization requirement”
  • the federal wiretap statute does not require the government to exhaust every conceivable alternative before obtaining a wiretap
  • reviewing de novo the denial of a Franks hearing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Reinhardt, Noonan, Thompson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.