# Moore v. United States

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · December 6, 1983 · 468 A.2d 1342

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9748251

## Case

- **Full name:** Samuel MOORE, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** December 6, 1983
- **Citations:** 468 A.2d 1342; 1983 D.C. App. LEXIS 529
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Newman
- **Judges:** Newman, Ne-Beker, Pryor
- **Cited by:** 13 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9748251

## Opinion text

*1347 NEWMAN, Chief Judge,
concurring:
Where the government’s contention is that as a result of a warrantless search of the person of the defendant certain evidence was seized, the defendant has standing to move for suppression. Nothing in United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83 , 100 S.Ct. 2547 , 65 L.Ed.2d 619 (1980), or Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 , 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978), is to the contrary. The fact that defendant contends the evidence was not seized from his person does not deprive him of standing.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9748251. Public record. Not legal advice.