First Circuit· 12/12/2011

United States v. Mitchell-Hunter

Citations

663 F.3d 45
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 24572
2011 WL 6144909

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the Confrontation Clause does not necessitate a pretrial hearing to consider whether a vessel is subject to United States jurisdiction within the meaning of the MDLEA
noting that defendant \d[id] not point to a single case extending the right to confrontation beyond the context of trial\
stating that jurisdiction under the MDLEA may be established \any time prior to trial\ (emphasis added)
collecting \extensive case law declining to apply the confrontation right to various pre- and post-trial proceedings\
applying the abuse- of-discretion standard to address whether a challenge to MDLEA jurisdiction required an evidentiary hearing
requiring defendants to make “a sufficient threshold showing that material facts were in doubt or dispute” to get an evidentiary hearing on a challenge to jurisdiction under the MDLEA (citation modified)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Torruella, Stahl, Thompson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

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

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.