COOPER ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES; MCCULLOCH V. UNITED STATES; MCKINNEY V. UNITED STATES; AND LOCKAMY V. UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (U.S. 1985)
  …he Ninth Circuit that interstate transportation of copies of infringing motion pictures and sound recordings comes within the statute, or assumed the same. See United States v. Drum, 733 F. 2d 1503, 1505-1506 (CA11) (sound recordings), cert. denied, 469 U. S. 1061 (1984); United States v. Gottesman, 724 F. 2d 1517, 1519-1521 (CA11 1984) (motion pictures); United States v. Whetzel, 191 U. S. App. D. C. 184, 187, n. 10, 589 F. 2d 707, 710, n. 10 (1978) (sound recordings); United States v. Berkwitt, 619 F. 2d…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. LeQUIRE, 943 F.2d 1554 (11th Cir. 1991)
  …cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1158, 105 S.Ct. 904, 83 L.Ed.2d 919 (1985) (prosecutor’s reference in his summation to “other people” was cured by district court’s instructions to jury); United States v. Drum, 733 F. 2d 1503, 1509 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1061, 105 S.Ct. 543, 83 L.Ed.2d 431 (1984) (where defendant was acquitted on one of two charges before jury, the fact that nine objections to the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument were sustained does not indicate that the prosecutor’s statements had a preju…
• United States v. Sachs, 801 F.2d 839 (6th Cir. 1986)
  …courts appear to have characterized the “first sale” doctrine as a defense, however, rather than as a burden initially carried by the government. See United States v. Drum, 733 F. 2d 1503, 1507 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, sub nom., McCulloch v. U.S., 469 U.S. 1061, 105 S.Ct. 543, 83 L.Ed.2d 431 (1984); Powell, 701 F. 2d at 72-73. Although we conclude that it is more logical to view the first sale doctrine as an implied governmental burden since the government does have the burden of establishing that the defe…