Citation network
United States Vs. Payner
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 23, 1980
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 727 (1980) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. PaynerSearch
-
U.S. 727 (1980) United States v. PaynerSearch
-
that of a third party, and respondent possessed no privacy interest in the documents seized in this case. Cf. Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
-
United States v. MillerSearch
-
in some detail last Term. Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
-
seizure violated the defendant's own constitutional rights. Id. at 439 U. S. 133 -140. See, e.g., Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Alderman v. UnitedSearch
-
Simmons v. UnitedSearch
-
the challenged conduct invaded his legitimate expectation of privacy, rather than that of a third party. Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Combs v. UnitedSearch
-
see 590 F.2d at 207. Nor do we. United States v. MillerSearch
-
replete with denunciations of willfully lawless activities undertaken in the name of law enforcement. E.g., Jackson v. DennoSearch
-
Olmsted v. UnitedSearch
-
evidence exacts a costly toll upon the ability of courts to ascertain the truth in a criminal case. E.g., Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
-
Michigan v. TuckerSearch
-
ideals of governmental rectitude would impede unacceptably the truthfinding functions of judge and jury. E.g., Stone v. PowellSearch
-
In United States v. CaceresSearch
-
we refused to exclude all evidence tainted by violations of an executive department's rules. And in Elkins v. UnitedSearch
-
Ibid. See also Nardone v. UnitedSearch
-
the exclusion of tainted evidence at the instance of a party who was not the victim of the challenged practices. Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
-
s suggestion that the Bahamian law of bank secrecy creates an expectation of privacy not present in United States v. MillerSearch
-
California Bankers Assn. v. ShultzSearch
-
Kaufman v. UnitedSearch
-
McNabb v. UnitedSearch
-
Elkins v. UnitedSearch
-
Rea v. UnitedSearch
-
Hampton v. UnitedSearch
-
among the parties before the bar. McNabb v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 394 U.S. at 394 U. S. 174 -175. See also Stone v. PowellSearch
-
Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule serves precisely the same purposes. Ibid., citing, inter alia, Dunaway v. NewSearch
-
York, 442 U. S. 200 , 442 U. S. 218 (1979), and Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
Stone v. PowellSearch
-
Stone v. PowellSearch
-
U. S. 165 , 342 U. S. 169 (1952), quoting Malinski v. NewSearch
-
Hampton v. UnitedSearch
-
judicial system in order to suppress evidence that the Government obtained through misconduct. See, e.g., McNabb v. UnitedSearch
-
Upshaw v. UnitedSearch
-
Mesarosh v. UnitedSearch
-
Mallory v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. PaynerSearch
-
Cf. Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
-
Term. Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
-
Brown v. UnitedSearch
-
Rakas v. IllinoisSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial