# Judge rules FISA is "exclusive" means for wiretapping -- POTUS can't use CinC power **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 3, 2008, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-rules-fisa-is-exclusive-means-for-wiretapping-potus-cant-use-cinc-power/455200 "2008-07-03T16:17:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 21
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2008, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-rules-fisa-is-exclusive-means-for-wiretapping-potus-cant-use-cinc-power/455200/21 "2008-07-10T03:09:00Z")
[QUOTE=Oy!] Wouldn’t the Lindburgh law cover that situation? Any death that is the result of a felony’s (attempted murder) being commited is 1st degree murder? Or is that a myth from my childhood? [/quote] No, that would like apply as well. But I only stuck murder in there because your original hypo was for murder, and I was already changing too much. If we made it wounding, though, we’d still have the doctrine of transferred intent to keep the crime as serious as it should be. So, George is wounded but doesn’t die. > [@](#): > > I’m not certain of your last sentence, so let me confirm: do you mean that the appellate court would review the evidence from the start, rather than looking at any aspect of the first trial? Just want to make sure. Not review the evidence – review the conclusions of law. The evidence, the facts, they are stuck with. They may _recite_ the facts; they don’t review them for correctness. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/judge-rules-fisa-is-exclusive-means-for-wiretapping-potus-cant-use-cinc-power/455200)._