The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Arias-Villanueva, 998 F.2d 1491 (9th Cir. 1993):
The defendants argue that the district court erred in denying their motions to suppress. The ultimate conclusion of the legality of a seizure is a mixed question of law and fact that we review de novo. United States v. Hernandez-Alvarado, 891 F.2d 1414, 1416 (9th Cir.1989). We review the underlying facts as found by the district court for clear error. United States v. Espinosa, 827 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 968, 108 S.Ct. 1243, 99 L.Ed.2d 441 (1988).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.