From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
United States v. Keszthelyi
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
308 F.3d 557 (2002)
Facts
Rudolph Keszthelyi (defendant) was being investigated for dealing cocaine. The police obtained an arrest warrant for Keszthelyi and a search warrant for his home based on evidence obtained from undercover law-enforcement agents and confidential informants. Keszthelyi was arrested in his vehicle on October 8, and cocaine was found in his car. Law enforcement searched his house on the same day and found guns, money, a digital scale, business records, pills, and drug paraphernalia, but no cocaine. The next day, agents decided to re-enter Keszthelyi’s house and continue the search but did not obtain a second search warrant. During this second search on October 9, approximately one ounce of cocaine was found behind Keszthelyi’s oven. On October 11, law enforcement obtained a new warrant to search the house again based on new information obtained from witnesses. No drugs were found during this third search. At trial, Keszthelyi filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized in the three searches based on a number of theories, including that the October 9 search was invalid because a new warrant should have been obtained prior to that search. The district court denied Keszthelyi’s motion, and he appealed the denial.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moore, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
