Dahda v. United States

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
17-43	10th Cir.	Feb 21, 2018	May 14, 2018	8-0	Breyer	OT 2017

Holding: Wiretap orders authorized by a judge for the federal district of Kansas in the government"s investigation of a suspected Kansas drug distribution ring were not facially insufficient, since they were not lacking any information that the wiretap statute required them to include and since the challenged language authorizing interception outside the court"s territorial jurisdiction was surplus.

Judgment: Affirmed, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on May 14, 2018. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Argument analysis: What makes wiretap orders "insufficient"? (Richard M. Re, February 22, 2018)
OT2017 #14: "Justice for Stormy" (First Mondays, February 19, 2018)
Argument preview: Should courts read statutory exclusionary rules broadly? (Richard M. Re, February 14, 2018)
Court releases February calendar (Amy Howe, December 21, 2017)
OT2017 #4: "Wind, Diabetes & Voluntary Retirement" (First Mondays, October 30, 2017)
Court adds four new cases to merits docket (Amy Howe, October 16, 2017)
Petition of the day (Aurora Barnes, August 10, 2017)

Date	Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
07/03/2017	Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 7, 2017)
08/02/2017	Order extending time to file response to petition to and including September 6, 2017.
09/06/2017	Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
09/20/2017	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2017.
09/20/2017	Reply of petitioner Los R. Dahda filed. (Distributed)
10/10/2017	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/13/2017.
10/16/2017	Petition GRANTED. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
11/15/2017	Motion for an extension of time filed.
11/16/2017	Motion to extend the time to file respondent's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including January 5, 2018.
11/28/2017	Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Los R. Dahda
11/30/2017	Brief of petitioner Los R. Dahda filed.
11/30/2017	Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
11/30/2017	Motion to file Volume II of the joint appendix under seal filed by petitioners Los R. Dahda.
12/07/2017	Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed.
12/07/2017	Brief amici curiae of Electronic Frontier Foundation and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
12/07/2017	Brief amicus curiae of Electronic Privacy Information Center filed.
12/20/2017	SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, February 21, 2018
01/05/2018	CIRCULATED
01/05/2018	Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)
01/08/2018	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/19/2018.
01/08/2018	Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/19/2018.
01/10/2018	Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit.
01/16/2018	Record from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER with the exception of the pleadings enclosed in 1 box.
01/22/2018	Motion to file Volume II of the joint appendix under seal GRANTED. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
02/05/2018	Reply of petitioner Los R. Dahda filed. (Distributed)
02/21/2018	Argued. For petitioner: Kannon K. Shanmugam, Washington, D.C. For respondent: Zachary D. Tripp, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
05/14/2018	Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except Gorsuch, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the cases.
06/15/2018	JUDGMENT ISSUED.