ANGELUCCI

v.

FITZGERALD, CORRECTIONS COMMISSIONER, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Rivera, 900 F.2d 1462 (10th Cir. 1990)
  …ious cases, which truly shock the conscience as well as the mind.” United States v. Penn, 647 F. 2d 876, 880 (9th Cir.) (en banc) (reversing district court’s ruling that Due Process Clause required the suppression of certain evidence), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 903, 101 S.Ct. 276, 66 L.Ed.2d 134 (1980). Based on our review of the entire record, we cannot conclude that defendant was deprived of his constitutional right to a fair trial. This was not a particularly complicated case, and defense counsel’s job was…
• United States v. Tamura, 694 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1982)
  …y incidentally seized some items not described in it). Nor was the behavior of the officers so unconscionable that it rises to the level of a due process violation. Cf. United States v. Penn, 647 F. 2d 876, 880-83 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 903, 101 S.Ct. 276, 66 L.Ed.2d 134 (1980). Therefore, the trial court properly admitted the documents described in the warrant. Because of our resolution of this issue, we do not address the Government’s argument that Tamura lacks standing to object to…
• Tarpley v. Greene, 684 F.2d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1982)
  …dence as fatal to his claim. . The manner in which a search is conducted can be unreasonable “even if the conduct did not rise to the shocking level of a due process violation.” United States v. Penn, 647 F. 2d 876, 882-83 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 903, 101 S.Ct. 276, 66 L.Ed.2d 134 (1980). . If appellant seeks to rely on his answers to interrogatories that appellees allege were filed in violation of an order compelling discovery, the District Court should determine whether those answers are prop…