· 7/21/2006
United States v. Dorcely, Daniel
Citations
- 454 F.3d 366
- 372 U.S. App. D.C. 170
- 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 18308
- 2006 WL 2034245
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[C]arefully considered language of the Supreme Court, even if technically dictum, generally must be treated as authoritative.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Sentelle, Henderson, Garland
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.