FRITTS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Bernard, 623 F.2d 551 (9th Cir. 1979)
  …a prudent man in believing that the petitioner had committed or was committing an offense.” Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 91, 85 S.Ct. 223, 225, 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964).23 See also United States v. See, 505 F. 2d 845, 854-855 (9 Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 992, 95 S.Ct. 1428, 43 L.Ed.2d 673 (1975). “In applying these standards, we must consider ail the facts known to the officers and consider all the reasonable inferences that could be drawn by them before the arrest.” United States v. Martin, 509 F. 2d 1…
• United States v. Sand, 541 F.2d 1370 (9th Cir. 1976)
  …ss than the maximum; hence, the scope of our review is limited almost to the vanishing point. United States v. Tucker, 1972, 404 U.S. 443, 447, 92 S.Ct. 589, 30 L.Ed.2d 592; United States v. See, 9 Cir., 1974, 505 F. 2d 845, 857, cert. denied, 1975, 420 U.S. 992, 95 S.Ct. 1428, 43 L.Ed.2d 673; United States v. James, 9 Cir., 1971, 443 F. 2d 348, 349. However, the district court’s discretion is not so totally unlimited that it can rely upon improper or inaccurate data in reaching its sentencing decision. Se…
• United States v. Yanagita, 552 F.2d 940 (2d Cir. 1977)
  …159 (2d Cir. 1975) (Lumbard, J., concurring). In addition, the duty of the government to respond under § 3504 may vary with the specificity of the claims raised by the witness. United States v. See, 505 F. 2d 845, 856 (9th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 992, 95 S.Ct. 1428, 43 L.Ed.2d 673 (1975); United States v. Stevens, 510 F. 2d 1101 (5th Cir. 1975). In the present case, the balance weighs decidedly in the government’s favor. A motion made by trial witnesses only minutes before the commencement of a…