BUSH

v.

FOSTER ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (34 total)

• United States v. Tortorello, 480 F.2d 764 (2d Cir. 1973)
  …e III in United States v. Cafero, 473 F. 2d 489 (3 Cir. 1973). . The quantum of probable cause required under Title III has been considered by a number of courts, including ours. United States v. Poeta, 455 F. 2d 117, 121-22 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 948 (1972) ; United States v. Kleve, 465 F. 2d 187, 190-93 (8 Cir. 1972) ; United States v. LaGorga, 336 F.Supp. 190, 193 (W.D.Pa. 1971) ; United States v. King, 335 F. Supp. 523, 532-37 (S.D.Cal.1971) ; United States v. Becker, 334 F.Supp. 546, 549-50…
• United States v. Alphonse Cirillo, 499 F.2d 872 (2d Cir. 1974)
  …ere no substantial rights are involved). Since the first order in this case was in “substantial compliance” with the statute we hold that it was valid. Compare Manfredi, supra, with United States v. Poeta, 455 F. 2d 117, 121 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 948, 92 S.Ct. 2041, 32 L.Ed.2d 337 (1972) and United States v. Rizzo, 492 F. 2d 443 (2d Cir. 1974). (b) Failure to Hold a Minimization Hearing Appellants next argue that the district court should not have denied their motions to suppress the wiretap e…
• United States v. Hinton, 543 F.2d 1002 (2d Cir. 1976)
  …ly have standing to challenge the wiretap at her residence on Staten Island. The Bronx apartment was apparently not used as a [*1012] residence by any of the appellants. See, e. g., United States v. Poeta, 455 F. 2d 117, 122 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 948, 92 S.Ct. 2041, 32 L.Ed.2d 337 (1972) (only those persons who have a privacy interest in the residence in which the tapped phone is located have standing). . There is some question as to whether a timely motion for severance was ever made by Mrs. D…