Arthur R. Decatur v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Arthur R. Decatur v. United States

392 F.2d 29, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7712

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 14, 1968

Docket21391

StatusPublished

This text of 392 F.2d 29 (Arthur R. Decatur v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arthur R. Decatur v. United States, 392 F.2d 29, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7712 (9th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Appellant mainly relies on a claim of illegal search and seizure. It is possible that there was an exploratory search too broad to be properly incident to De-Catur’s arrest. But it would appear that all of the tangible real objects offered in evidence were seized from points immediately adjacent to the spot where De-Catur was arrested. If some item crept into evidence that was illegally seized, no record was made in the trial court and we are not told what it was.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Appellant mainly relies on a claim of illegal search and seizure. It is possible that there was an exploratory search too broad to be properly incident to De-Catur’s arrest. But it would appear that all of the tangible real objects offered in evidence were seized from points immediately adjacent to the spot where De-Catur was arrested. If some item crept into evidence that was illegally seized, no record was made in the trial court and we are not told what it was.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

392 F.2d 29, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arthur-r-decatur-v-united-states-ca9-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack