United States v. D.K. Johnson

How courts have described this case

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

• adding that, under such circumstances, \there [was] no reason why the independent source doctrine should not apply\
• finding that the independent source doctrine applied where the government began reviewing evidence under a mistaken belief it could do so
• Applying the independent source doctrine to illegally seized tapes where “[o]nce the district court expressed reservations about the legality of the review of the tapes, the government realized that a warrant was necessary.”
• \What is key is that [law enforcement's unlawful conduct] did not result in the government obtaining evidence it would not have otherwise obtained.\
• agents' decision to get warrant was prompted by the \obvious relevance\ of what might be on audiotape recordings, not by the agents' unlawfully listening to the recordings before getting a warrant
• “the warrant application was prompted not by the prior review but by the obvious relevance of the tapes and the district court’s indication that a warrant was necessary”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).