Circuit split · criminal procedure

The scope of the Government's right to appeal an adverse district-court order in a criminal case under 18 U.S.C. § 3731

1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.

Government of the Virgin Islands v. Hodge359 F3D 312
Third Circuit Court of Appeals · February 26, 2004
“§ 3731 reveals an early split among the circuits on this score.” — Acknowledges a circuit split
Empirical analysis of this case →

The provision at issue

18 U.S.C. § 3731 — Appeal by United States

“In a criminal case an appeal by the United States shall lie to a court of appeals from a decision, judgment, or order of a district court dismissing an indictment or information or granting a new trial after verdict or judgment, as to any one or more counts, or any part thereof, except that no appeal shall lie where the double jeopardy clause of the United States Constitution prohibits further prosecution. An appeal by the United States shall lie to a court of appeals from a decision or order of a district court suppressing or excluding …”

Read the full section →

The other side of the split

Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.

On the other side · 3d Cir.In re Grand Jury Investigation599 F.2d 1226
“Compare In re Grand Jury Investigation, 599 F.2d at 1226 (3d Cir.), and Comiskey, 460 F.2d at 1297-98 (7th Cir.), with United States v.” — Government of the Virgin Islands v. Hodge, acknowledging the split
On the other side · 7th Cir.Comiskey460 F.2d 1297
“Compare In re Grand Jury Investigation, 599 F.2d at 1226 (3d Cir.), and Comiskey, 460 F.2d at 1297-98 (7th Cir.), with United States v.” — Government of the Virgin Islands v. Hodge, acknowledging the split
On the other side · 9th Cir.United States v. Loud Hawk628 F.2d 1139
“More recently, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has expressly declined to hold that subsequent Supreme Court decisions have implicitly overruled Loud Hawk, see United States v.” — Government of the Virgin Islands v. Hodge, acknowledging the split
Joined by · 11th Cir.United States v. C.G.736 F.2d 1474
Declined to follow · 1st Cir.United States v. Bouthot878 F.2d 1506
Declined to follow · 9th Cir.United States v. Adrian978 F.2d 486
“Adrian, 978 F.2d 486 , 490-91 (9th Cir.1992), and continues to require the government to establish by more than mere certification that the suppressed evidence constitutes "substantial proof.” The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently acknowledged this continuing split, and sided with this Circuit and the Seventh Circuit.” — Government of the Virgin Islands v. Hodge, acknowledging the split
Joined by · 8th Cir.United States v. Johnson228 F.3d 920
Discussed · 9th Cir.United States v. Poulsen41 F.3d 1330
“Poulsen, 41 F.3d 1330 (9th Cir.1994), for the proposition that mere certification is insufficient.” — Government of the Virgin Islands v. Hodge, acknowledging the split

What the split turns on

Statutes:: 18 U.S.C. § 3731

Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.