44 Cited authorities

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte
412 U.S. 218 (1973) Cited 11,995 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding the State need not prove knowing-and-deliberate consent to search
Florida v. Royer
460 U.S. 491 (1983) Cited 6,718 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government bears the burden of demonstrating reasonable suspicion
Dunaway v. New York
442 U.S. 200 (1979) Cited 3,746 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that seizing and transporting a suspect to a police station for interrogation without probable cause violated the Fourth Amendment
Brown v. Illinois
422 U.S. 590 (1975) Cited 3,992 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding statement was fruit of Fourth Amendment violation where police "illegality . . . had a quality of purposefulness" as "[t]he impropriety of the arrest was obvious" and detectives acknowledged "that the purpose of their action was 'for investigation' or for 'questioning'"
Bumper v. North Carolina
391 U.S. 543 (1968) Cited 2,828 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that acquiescence to a claim of lawful authority “cannot be consent”
Taylor v. Alabama
457 U.S. 687 (1982) Cited 573 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that six-hour interval did not favor Government where defendant was "in police custody, unrepresented by counsel, and he was questioned on several occasions"
G. M. Leasing Corp. v. United States
429 U.S. 338 (1977) Cited 654 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that IRS agents did not violate the Fourth Amendment by seizing vehicles to satisfy a debt because the seizures occurred on public streets and therefore did not violate the debtor’s privacy rights.
U.S. v. Gonzalez
71 F.3d 819 (11th Cir. 1996) Cited 232 times
Finding the enhancement was warranted by the defendant's conduct — driving in reverse down a short residential street to U-turn around a police car
U.S. v. Tovar-Rico
61 F.3d 1529 (11th Cir. 1995) Cited 126 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding there was no consent where five police officers knocked on defendant’s door, announced their identity, and asked for permission to enter — and then rushed into the home with guns drawn as soon as defendant opened the door
United States v. Chemaly
741 F.2d 1346 (11th Cir. 1984) Cited 86 times
Rejecting suppression because Congress intended no such remedy
Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 Cited 48,869 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."
Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 Cited 22,233 times 16 Legal Analyses
Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
Rule 36 - Requests for Admission
Fed. R. Civ. P. 36 Cited 6,125 times 12 Legal Analyses
Noting that facts admitted pursuant to a Rule 36 discovery request are "conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended"
Section 881 - Forfeitures
21 U.S.C. § 881 Cited 4,880 times 7 Legal Analyses
Adopting five-year statute of limitations of 19 U.S.C. § 1621
Section 9-11-56 - Summary judgment
Ga. Code § 9-11-56 Cited 3,740 times 1 Legal Analyses
Authorizing the direct appeal of “[a]n order granting summary judgment on any issue”
Section 983 - General rules for civil forfeiture proceedings
18 U.S.C. § 983 Cited 2,801 times 8 Legal Analyses
Noting that for purposes of the innocent owner defense to civil forfeiture, "no person may assert an ownership interest under this subsection in contraband or other property that it is illegal to possess"

United States of America v. Currency

44 Cited authorities

Holding the State need not prove knowing-and-deliberate consent to search

Holding that the government bears the burden of demonstrating reasonable suspicion

Holding that seizing and transporting a suspect to a police station for interrogation without probable cause violated the Fourth Amendment

Holding statement was fruit of Fourth Amendment violation where police "illegality . . . had a quality of purposefulness" as "[t]he impropriety of the arrest was obvious" and detectives acknowledged "that the purpose of their action was 'for investigation' or for 'questioning'"

Holding that acquiescence to a claim of lawful authority “cannot be consent”

Holding that six-hour interval did not favor Government where defendant was "in police custody, unrepresented by counsel, and he was questioned on several occasions"

Holding that IRS agents did not violate the Fourth Amendment by seizing vehicles to satisfy a debt because the seizures occurred on public streets and therefore did not violate the debtor’s privacy rights.

Finding the enhancement was warranted by the defendant's conduct — driving in reverse down a short residential street to U-turn around a police car

Holding there was no consent where five police officers knocked on defendant’s door, announced their identity, and asked for permission to enter — and then rushed into the home with guns drawn as soon as defendant opened the door

Rejecting suppression because Congress intended no such remedy

Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

Noting that facts admitted pursuant to a Rule 36 discovery request are "conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended"

Adopting five-year statute of limitations of 19 U.S.C. § 1621

Authorizing the direct appeal of “[a]n order granting summary judgment on any issue”

Noting that for purposes of the innocent owner defense to civil forfeiture, "no person may assert an ownership interest under this subsection in contraband or other property that it is illegal to possess"