ETTER

v.

COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

• United States v. Caldwell, 954 F.2d 496 (8th Cir. 1992)
  …a lawyer present during questioning “meets the minimum requirements of the Constitution,” though “it would not be amiss for Guam to revise its form to more clearly warn of the [*507] right to consult with counsel before questioning.”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 828, 106 S.Ct. 90, 88 L.Ed.2d 74 (1985); United States v. Noti, 731 F. 2d 610, 614-615 (9th Cir.1984) (warning held to be inadequate where it failed to inform the defendant that he had a right to counsel during questioning as well as before questioning)…
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n & Lieutenant Otto J. Binker v. Commonwealth OF Pa., 829 F.2d 392 (3d Cir. 1987)
  …determination that mandatory retirement is not reasonably necessary to essence of sheriff’s department’s business supported by absence of fitness monitoring). But see EEOC v. Missouri State Highway Patrol, 748 F. 2d 447 (8th Cir.1984), cert, denied, 474 U.S. 828, 106 S.Ct. 88, 88 L.Ed.2d 72 (1985) (physical fitness program of questionable relevance to BFOQ defense). Until minimum standards are developed, implemented and enforced, the PSP cannot justify its mandatory retirement law by relying on good health…
• United States v. Connell, 869 F.2d 1349 (9th Cir. 1989)
  …OF MIRANDA WARNINGS A. Standard of Review Whether Connell was given adequate Miranda warnings is a question of law that is reviewed de novo by the appellate court. See Territory of Guam v. Snaer, 758 F. 2d 1341, 1342 n. 1 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 828, 106 S.Ct. 90, 88 L.Ed.2d 74 (1985); United States v. Noti, 731 F. 2d 610, 614 (9th Cir.1984). “De novo review is appropriate because the adequacy of Miranda warnings involves application of a legal standard to a set of facts, which ‘require[s] the…