United States v. Martin

866 F. 2d 972 (1989)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Martin

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
866 F. 2d 972 (1989)

RW

Facts

The federal government (plaintiff) prosecuted Terry Jon Martin and John David Emerson (defendant) on two counts relating to the burglary and attempted burglary of drug stores in New Hope and Frazee, Minnesota. Because the stores sold controlled substances, the offenses were federal crimes under 18 U.S.C. § 2118(b). As to the New Hope burglary, the trial evidence included a police informant's identification of Martin and Emerson as the burglars. The informant's testimony was corroborated by the testimony of several store employees who said they saw Martin and Emerson case the store the day before the burglary. As to the attempted Frazee burglary, the Frazee police chief testified that he briefly detained Martin, who was driving a car in which Emerson was a passenger, after seeing Martin stop the car in front of the store and test the store's lock. The chief let Martin and Emerson go, even though he observed Martin wearing a "booster coat" of the type often used by burglars and thieves to stow stolen goods, and saw that the car contained tools often used to commit burglary. However, when the chief learned that Martin's car was stolen, police detectives obtained search warrants that turned up burglary tools and stolen narcotics in Martin's car and Emerson's house. The jury convicted Martin and Emerson on both counts. On appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, Emerson argued that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction on either count.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Henley, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership