United States v. Louis D. Smith

524 F.2d 1287, 173 U.S. App. D.C. 313
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided November 14, 1975·No. 75-1016·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Following our remand of the record August 1, 1975, for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the court of that date, the District Court, on September 3, 1975, filed a Memorandum and Order pursuant to the remand. The Memorandum and Order include findings that the “record clearly establishes that the police entered forcibly after adequate announcement when exigent circumstances suggesting destruction or concealment were created by noises heard inside”, and that 18 U.S.C. § 3109 was complied with.

We think these findings should be sustained. Considered with the findings of the District Court made when the motion to suppress was denied by the District Court, the judgment of convictions is affirmed. Masiello v. United States, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 57, 317 F.2d 121 (1963).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Louis D. Smith, 524 F.2d 1287, 173 U.S. App. D.C. 313 (D.C. Cir. 1975).

524 F.2d 1287 (United States v. Louis D. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

West v. United States
710 A.2d 866 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1998)
United States v. Sonia E. Mayfield
995 F.2d 306 (D.C. Circuit, 1993)
Culp v. United States
624 A.2d 460 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1993)
United States v. Bobby Staten
581 F.2d 878 (D.C. Circuit, 1978)
United States v. Covington
385 A.2d 164 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1978)
United States v. Salvatore Ross Agrusa
541 F.2d 690 (Eighth Circuit, 1976)