United States v. Harju, Matthew S.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that officers relied on the warrant in good faith where three weeks had elapsed between the time the informant saw the guns and the issuance of the warrant
• noting, in applying the good faith exception, that “unlike small amounts of drugs or cash, [a] gun [is] not likely to have been sold (or consumed)” within a three-week period
• noting, in applying the good faith exception, that “unlike small amounts of drugs or cash, [a] gun [is] not likely to have been sold (or con‐ sumed)” within a three‐week period
• although three weeks passed between the gun’s sighting and the warrant’s execution, the gun, unlike drugs or cash, “was not likely to have been sold (or consumed) during that period”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).