CHERRY

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (45 total)

• State v. Parrish, 567 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
  …that after the charges were filed in this case, other persons were arrested on charges of homestead exemption violations. In addition to its narrow class argument, the state cites Taylor v. United States, 798 F. 2d 271 (7th Cir.1986) cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1056, 107 S.Ct. 933, 93 L.Ed.2d 983 (1987), for the proposition that late prosecution of others similarly situated will preclude a selective prosecution defense. In Taylor, the selective prosecution claim was considered post-trial, because the defendant…
• State v. Polanco, 658 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
  …es outlined in Oregon v. Elstad also apply “when the alleged ‘fruit’ of a non-coercive Miranda violation is ... an article of evidence” 470 U.S. at 308, 105 S.Ct. at 1293; see also United States v. Cherry, 794 F. 2d 201 (5th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1056, 107 S.Ct. 932, 93 L.Ed.2d 983 (1987). Consequently, the same decisional law should be applied in determining whether the articles of bloody clothing must be suppressed. In summary, we hold that the defendant was not in custody for Miranda purposes…
• United States v. Terzado-Madruga, 897 F.2d 1099 (11th Cir. 1990)
  …ion of evidence would fail to restore the parties to their previous positions and thus upset the careful weighing of competing interests underlying the exclusionary rule. Id.; see United States v. Cherry, 759 F. 2d 1196 (5th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1056, 107 S.Ct. 932, 93 L.Ed.2d 983 (1987). With respect to the burden of proof, the Court held that, in order for otherwise tainted evidence to be admissible, the prosecution had to demonstrate the applicability of the inevitable discovery exception by…