United States v. Pastore

Second Circuit

United States v. Pastore

456 F.2d 99

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedFebruary 28, 1972

DocketNo. 382, Docket 71-1450

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 456 F.2d 99 (United States v. Pastore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Pastore, 456 F.2d 99 (2d Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The government asks us to overrule our recent decision in United States v. Price, 447 F.2d 23, 29 (2d Cir. 1971), holding that a defendant charged with possession of stolen goods ipso facto has standing to move for suppression of evidence seized in violation of the fourth amendment.

We all agree that we should follow the Price decision which decided this issue and which followed Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257, 80 S.Ct. 725, 4 L. Ed.2d 697 (1960). The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to the Sixth Circuit in United States v. Combs, 446 F.2d 515 (6th Cir. 1971), and will consider the precise issue. Judge Medina is of the view that the facts in the case we are now deciding seem to be stronger for the government’s position than those in Combs, and that he believes Jones is distinguishable.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The government asks us to overrule our recent decision in United States v. Price, 447 F.2d 23, 29 (2d Cir. 1971), holding that a defendant charged with possession of stolen goods ipso facto has standing to move for suppression of evidence seized in violation of the fourth amendment.

We all agree that we should follow the Price decision which decided this issue and which followed Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257, 80 S.Ct. 725, 4 L. Ed.2d 697 (1960). The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to the Sixth Circuit in United States v. Combs, 446 F.2d 515 (6th Cir. 1971), and will consider the precise issue. Judge Medina is of the view that the facts in the case we are now deciding seem to be stronger for the government’s position than those in Combs, and that he believes Jones is distinguishable.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

456 F.2d 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-pastore-ca2-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack