Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Fourth Circuit· 2/8/2019

United States v. Samuel Pratt

Citations

  • 915 F.3d 266

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that the government might retain an item with “independent evidentiary value, like a murder weapon,” indefinitely
  • explaining that issue is preserved for appellate review “if pressed or passed upon” (citing United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36, 41 (1992))
  • explaining that “a full resentencing is typically appropriate” upon vacatur of some but not all of a defendant’s convictions
  • reasoning that where only a phone’s files “had evidentiary value,” the files could be “removed or copied” and the phone “returned” after examination pursuant to a warrant
  • holding thirty-one day delay in obtaining search warrant unreasonable, and rejecting government argument that cell phone had independent evidentiary value, because \[o]nly the phone's files had evidentiary value . . . the phone itself is evidence of nothing\
  • relying heavily on fact that “government has no persuasive justification for the delay in obtaining a search warrant” to find 31-day delay unreasonable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Motz, Agee, Diaz

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

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

Other cases named United States v. Samuel Pratt

1 other CourtListener record shares 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.