Dewayne Johnson v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Dewayne Johnson v. United States

358 F.2d 139

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 6, 1966

Docket22773

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 358 F.2d 139 (Dewayne Johnson v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dewayne Johnson v. United States, 358 F.2d 139 (5th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The appellant was convicted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas of unlawful possession of stolen mail in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1708. The sole question presented on this appeal is whether the District Court erred in admitting into evidence certain articles found in an automobile by postal inspectors after the automobile had been lawfully repossessed by appellant’s mortgagee who granted permission to search it without a warrant.

Appellant contends that under the laws of Texas legal title to the automobile was still in his name; therefore, the postal inspectors were required to obtain his permission for a warrantless search. The Government contends that the mortgagee had lawful possession of the vehicle; therefore, permission of the mortgagee rendered the search lawful

The person in lawful possession of an automobile has authority to grant permission to search it. None of appellant’s constitutional liberties were violated in the circumstances. See Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 241, 80 S.Ct. 683, 4 L.Ed.2d 668 (1960); Parr v. United States, 255 F.2d 86 (5 Cir. 1958). The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The appellant was convicted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas of unlawful possession of stolen mail in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1708. The sole question presented on this appeal is whether the District Court erred in admitting into evidence certain articles found in an automobile by postal inspectors after the automobile had been lawfully repossessed by appellant’s mortgagee who granted permission to search it without a warrant.

Appellant contends that under the laws of Texas legal title to the automobile was still in his name; therefore, the postal inspectors were required to obtain his permission for a warrantless search. The Government contends that the mortgagee had lawful possession of the vehicle; therefore, permission of the mortgagee rendered the search lawful

The person in lawful possession of an automobile has authority to grant permission to search it. None of appellant’s constitutional liberties were violated in the circumstances. See Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 241, 80 S.Ct. 683, 4 L.Ed.2d 668 (1960); Parr v. United States, 255 F.2d 86 (5 Cir. 1958). The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

358 F.2d 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dewayne-johnson-v-united-states-ca5-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack