HOGAN ET UX.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Haldeman, 559 F.2d 31 (D.C. Cir. 1976)
• United States v. Allen, 554 F.2d 398 (10th Cir. 1977)
  …vant circumstances. Where, as here, the inquiry is whether certain material might be exculpatory, we feel that an in camera examination by the court is constitutionally permissible. United States v. Ross, 511 F. 2d 757, 765 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 836, 96 S.Ct. 62, 46 L.Ed.2d 54; see e. g., United States v. Gleeson, 411 F. 2d 1091, 1094 (10th Cir.). The trial court examined the material in camera27 and found that (R. XXIII, 1071): It has absolutely nothing to do with this particular lawsuit. It…
• DOE v. Webster, 606 F.2d 1226 (D.C. Cir. 1979)
  …echnical” ground, there may arguably be a need to retain the record for investigatory purposes in the event that another, similar, offense is committed. See generally Part VII, infra. . United States v. Linn, 513 F. 2d 925 (10th Cir.) cert. denied, 423 U.S. 836, 96 S.Ct. 63, 46 L.Ed.2d 55 (1975); Rogers v. Slaughter, 469 F. 2d 1084, 1085 (5th Cir. 1972). . See Stevenson v. United States, 127 U.S. App.D.C. 43, 380 F. 2d 590, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 962, 88 S.Ct. 347, 19 L.Ed.2d 375 (1967); United States v.…