U.S. v. Consolidation Coal Co.
| Citation | 579 F.2d 1011 |
| Decision Date | 25 July 1978 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 76-2518,76-2521 and 76-2522,s. 76-2518 |
| Parties | 6 O.S.H. Cas.(BNA) 2185, 1979 O.S.H.D. (CCH) P 23,242 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee, Darrell Hazelwood, Francis Leo Marks, Raymond J. Zitko, Robert Laskick, Richard Schrickel, Samuel Kirkland, Paul R. Kidney and James Kull, Defendants. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Francis Leo MARKS, Defendant-Appellee, Darrell Hazelwood, Raymond J. Zitko, James Kull, Richard Schrickel, Samuel Kirkland, Paul R. Kidney, Robert Lasick and Consolidation Coal Company, Defendants. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Raymond ZITKO, Defendant-Appellee, Darrell Hazelwood, James Kull, Richard Schrickel, Francis Leo Marks, Samuel Kirkland, Paul R. Kidney, Robert Lasick and Consolidation Coal Company, Defendants. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit) |
William W. Milligan, U. S. Atty., Columbus, Ohio, Richard I. Chaifetz, Robert E. Courtney, III, Sp. Asst. U. S. Attys., Philip Wilens, Dept. of Justice, Crim. Div., Washington, D. C., for the U. S.
William J. Melvin, Fontana, Ward, Kaps & Perry, Columbus, Ohio, Anthony J. Polito, Roger E. J. Curran, Rose, Schmidt, Dixon, Hasley & White, Pittsburgh, Pa., for Consolidation Coal Co.
Richard C. Addison, Addison & Smith, Columbus, Ohio, Charles H. Bean, St. Clairsville, Ohio, for Francis Leo Marks.
William J. Abraham, Abraham & Purkey, Richard C. Addison, Columbus, Ohio, for Raymond Zitko.
Before CELEBREZZE and ENGEL, Circuit Judges, and CECIL, Senior Circuit Judge.
In United States v. Consolidation Coal Co., 560 F.2d 214 (6th Cir. 1977), Vacated and Remanded --- U.S. ----, 98 S.Ct. 2841, 56 L.Ed.2d 783 (1978), this court reversed the district court's suppression of evidence seized from the offices of a coal mine operator. We reasoned that the district court erred in applying conventional criminal probable cause tests in examining the sufficiency of the search warrants involved. We upheld the warrants based upon "a lesser showing of probable cause comparable to that required to obtain a warrant to perform a periodic, administrative inspection of a commercial establishment." 560 F.2d at 218.
Three defendants petitioned the Supreme Court for writs of certiorari. In response thereto, the Supreme Court vacated our judgment and remanded the causes to this Court "for further consideration in light of Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc., 436 U.S. ---- (, 98 S.Ct. 1816, 56 L.Ed.2d 305) (1978) and Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. ---- (, 98 S.Ct. 1942, 56 L.Ed.2d 486) (1978)."
Inasmuch as the searches in question were conducted pursuant to search warrants and we have determined that the warrants met the same administrative search probable cause standard articulated in Marshall 1 and Tyler, 2 we see no reason to alter our original holding. Moreover, our holding that administrative search warrants were required under the facts of this case under the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cooley v. US
...560 F.2d 214, 218 (6th Cir.1977), vacated and remanded, 436 U.S. 942, 98 S.Ct. 2841, 56 L.Ed.2d 783 (1978), judgment reinstated, 579 F.2d 1011 (6th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1069, 99 S.Ct. 836, 59 L.Ed.2d 34 V. THE PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS With this background in mind, the Court will revi......
-
U.S. v. Blue Diamond Coal Co.
...560 F.2d 214, 217 (6th Cir. 1977), vacated and remanded 436 U.S. 942, 98 S.Ct. 2841, 56 L.Ed.2d 783 (1978), judgment reinstated 579 F.2d 1011 (6th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1069, 99 S.Ct. 836, 59 L.Ed.2d 34 Even where a statute requires records to be maintained and authorizes on-pr......
-
Blackie's House of Beef, Inc. v. Castillo, s. 79-1057
...1381 (10th Cir. 1978); United States v. Consolidated Coal Co., 560 F.2d 214, 218 (6th Cir. 1977), reinstated after remand, 579 F.2d 1011, 1012 (6th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1069, 99 S.Ct. 836, 59 L.Ed.2d 34 (1979).16 Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499, 98 S.Ct. 1942, 56 L.Ed.2d 486 (......
-
Burkart Randall Div. of Textron, Inc. v. Marshall
...1377, 1381 (10th Cir. 1978); U. S. v. Consolidation Coal Co., 560 F.2d 214, 218 (6th Cir. 1977), reinstated after remand, 579 F.2d 1011, 1012 (6th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1069, 99 S.Ct. 836, 59 L.Ed.2d 34 7 The portion of the application which is said to supply "specific evidence......