United States v. Quentin Hinton, AKA Ronnie Baldwin

How courts have described this case

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

• while a few weeks of variance is allowable, seven months of variance “between the facts proved and the dates alleged in the indictment” is “prejudicial”
• no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in a parcel locker that cannot be individually rented
• “[bjecause there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a parcel locker at a post office, we need not determine if [the defendant] had a subjective expectation of privacy therein”
• “[T]he test of sufficiency of the indictment is not whether it could have been framed in a more satisfactory manner, but whether it conforms to minimal constitutional standards.”
• \It is well-settled that the government need prove only that Hinton shipped the package 'reasonably near' the date specified in the indictment.\(citing United States v. Tsinhnahijinnie, 112 F.3d 988, 991 (9th Cir. 1997))
• “[S]uppresion is not the appropriate remedy for failure to fol- low agency regulations.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).