Fourth Circuit· 11/19/2010

United States v. Hargrove

Citations

625 F.3d 170
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 23839
2010 WL 4676980

How courts have described this case

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

holding that plain error is proper standard of review for claim, raised for first time on appeal, that district court committed substantive error by considering improper sentencing factor
explaining that a statement that a suspect is not under arrest is entitled to some weight but is less significant than a statement that he is free to leave
finding that any limitations on the defendant’s freedom of movement during the search were only minor, and therefore, did not weigh toward a finding that the defendant was in custody
pointing out that Lynn called for plain error review when a procedural sentencing error is raised for the first time on appeal
noting the importance of “secur[ing] the site for conducting a search pursuant to a valid search warrant”
pointing out that Lynn called for plain error review when a procedural sentencing error is raised for the first time on appeal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Traxler, Motz, Agee

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

32 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

38 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Hargrove

24 other CourtListener records share this case name.

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.