Jackson v. United States
| Docket Number | 00-5738. |
| Decision Date | 04 December 2000 |
| Citation | 531 U.S. 1033 |
| Parties | JACKSON v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
C. A. 10th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466 (2000).
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
United States v. Lucas
... ... which holds that a defendant similarly moving for suppression ... of warrantless pole camera footage “‘had no ... reasonable expectation of privacy that was intruded upon by ... the video cameras.'” Id. at 12 (quoting ... United States v. Jackson , 213 F.3d 1269, 1281 (10th ... Cir.), vacated on other grounds , 531 U.S. 1033 ... (2000)) ... In ... United States v. Jackson , our Circuit held that ... warrantless pole cameras-recording outside, but not inside, a ... residence-didn't ... ...
-
United States v. Jackson, Case No. CR-98-94-D
...original sentence was imposed in 1998, but vacated in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). See Jackson v. United States, 531 U.S. 1033 (2000); United States v. Jackson, 240 F.3d 1245 (10th Cir. 2001). Upon remand for resentencing, the same prison sentence was imposed in 200......
1 books & journal articles
-
Chapter 8. Electronic Media Concerns
...of privacy, and therefore, no warrant is required. United States v. Jackson, 213 F.3d 1269 (10th Cir.), rev’d on other grounds, 531 U.S. 1033 (2000); State v. Augafa, 992 P.2d 723 (Haw. App. 1999). These devices are often mounted on utility poles, and thus are called “pole cameras.” Most co......