Powell v. United States

Decision Date02 October 2017
Docket NumberNo. 16–1477.,16–1477.
CitationPowell v. United States, 138 S.Ct. 143(Mem), 199 L.Ed.2d 36(Mem) (2017)
Parties Carlos Ellis POWELL and Eric Jerome Powell, petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • United States v. Gordon
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan
    • September 12, 2018
    ... ... United States , 468 U.S. 796, 804, 104 S.Ct. 3380, 82 L.Ed.2d 599 (1984) (quotation marks omitted) ); see also Wong Sun v. United States , 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963) (same); and United States v. Powell , 847 F.3d 760, 768 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 143, 199 L.Ed.2d 36 (2017) (same). A defendant 346 F.Supp.3d 1006 does not only have standing under this doctrine in relation to her own property, but also in relation to property or information from third ... ...
  • United States v. Bateman
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • December 23, 2019
    ... ... Moorehead , 912 F.3d 963, 966 (6th Cir. 2019) (quoting United States v. Buford , 632 F.3d 264, 268 (6th Cir. 2011) ). The evidence is assessed "in the light most likely to support the district court’s decision." Id. (quoting United States v. Powell , 847 F.3d 760, 767 (6th Cir.), cert. denied , ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S. Ct. 143, 199 L.Ed.2d 36 (2017) ). "[A] denial of a motion to suppress will be affirmed on appeal if the district court’s conclusion can be justified for any reason." Id ... (alteration in original) (quoting ... ...
  • United States v. Moorehead
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • January 9, 2019
    ... ... Buford , 632 F.3d 264, 268 (6th Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). The evidence is reviewed "in the light most likely to support the district court's decision." United States v. Powell , 847 F.3d 760, 767 (6th Cir. 2017), cert. denied , ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 143, 199 L.Ed.2d 36 (2017) (citations omitted). "[A] denial of a motion to suppress will be affirmed on appeal if the district court's conclusion can be justified for any reason." United States v. Pasquarille ... ...