United States v. Robert H. Davis, United States of America v. George D. Gelestino

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 First Amendment definition should be applied by analogy in the Franks setting
• noting that an admitted criminal participant has strong incentive to tell the truth because “should he lie to the police,” he “risks disfavor with the prosecution”
• stating judges evaluating the existence of probable cause “need not confine their evaluations within rigorous legalistic boundaries but instead may use their common sense”
• finding exigent circum- stances when police arrived at 2:00 am, knocked upon the door, waited only 15-30 seconds, heard no noise within, but only observed lights inside
• refusing to suppress a defendant's grand-jury testimony (provided as part of his plea agreement
• finding ambiguous same language in former Rule 410, Fed. R. Evid., and former Rule 11(e)(6), Fed. R. Crim. P., and applying construction principles to interpret rules and determine intended application and scope

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).