Skip to main content
First Circuit· 11/22/2013

United States v. Thomas

Citations

  • 736 F.3d 54
  • 2013 WL 6133213
  • 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 23564

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that social costs of excluding DNA sample obtained in earlier investigation would outweigh deterrent value
  • reasoning that the “hypothesized deterrent effect is simply too attenuated to justify applying the exclusionary rule” since “[t]he underlying conduct that violated the Fourth Amendment took place six or seven years ago”
  • discussing Herring's application of exclusionary rule and applying Herring to suppression claims based on alleged police misconduct
  • declining to apply the exclusionary rule where the court saw “no evidence . . . that the postal inspectors involved in obtaining and executing the subpoena [for a DNA sample in 2005] knowingly engaged in any misconduct”
  • in which the court, which like “[m]ost other circuits” follows the rule announced in James, see United States v. Dessesaure, 429 F.3d 359, 366 (1st Cir. 2005

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lynch, Thompson, Kayatta

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

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

Other cases with this 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.