The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Palmer, 3 F.3d 300 (9th Cir. 1993):
Palmer argues that the district court erred in denying his suppression motion because the search did not comport with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(c), which requires warrants issued thereunder to be served in the daytime. The ultimate conclusion of the legality of the search is a mixed question of law and fact reviewed de novo. United States v. Thomas, 863 F.2d 622, 625 (9th Cir.1988). The underlying factual issues are reviewed for clear error. Id.
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.