United States v. Verdugo

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that while unpreserved claims are usually reviewed for plain error, counsel failed to object for tactical reasons, and “[h]aving made this choice, [defendant] cannot now challenge the court’s failure to exclude [testimony],” as it is waived
• concluding that authorities who had stopped defendant’s truck and executed arrest warrant on charge of drug trafficking had probable cause to search truck for cellphone used by defendant in multiple, intercepted conversations coordinating drug deal
• noting that \the district court retained substantial discretion under Fed. R. Evid. 611(a) to apply the rule of completeness to oral statements\
• noting that the district court \retained substantial discretion under Fed. R. Evid. 611(a) to apply the rule of completeness to oral statements\
• declining to reach the merits of a claim asserting a violation of Miranda because \the claimed error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt\
• assessing “the collective knowledge of the agents working . . . on [an] investigation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).