Henry Howard Chamblee v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Henry Howard Chamblee v. United States

402 F.2d 296, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5111

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 28, 1968

Docket26201

StatusPublished

This text of 402 F.2d 296 (Henry Howard Chamblee 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

Henry Howard Chamblee v. United States, 402 F.2d 296, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5111 (5th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of transporting a stolen automobile in interstate commerce. 18 U.S.C.A. section 2312. He complains of the failure of the court to suppress or exclude certain evidence obtained from him or from the automobile in question. The basis of the complaint is an illegal arrest or an illegal search by state officers or both. In our view there was adequate cause for the arrest and the searches were incident to the arrest. Nicholson v. United States, 5 Cir., 1966, 355 F.2d 80.

There is no merit in the additional- contention of a Fifth Amendment violation within the teaching of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 1966, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602,16 L.Ed.2d 694. The evidence of transportation of the automobile by appellant in interstate commerce and knowledge on his part that the automobile was stolen was ample.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was convicted of transporting a stolen automobile in interstate commerce. 18 U.S.C.A. section 2312. He complains of the failure of the court to suppress or exclude certain evidence obtained from him or from the automobile in question. The basis of the complaint is an illegal arrest or an illegal search by state officers or both. In our view there was adequate cause for the arrest and the searches were incident to the arrest. Nicholson v. United States, 5 Cir., 1966, 355 F.2d 80.

There is no merit in the additional- contention of a Fifth Amendment violation within the teaching of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 1966, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602,16 L.Ed.2d 694. The evidence of transportation of the automobile by appellant in interstate commerce and knowledge on his part that the automobile was stolen was ample.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

402 F.2d 296, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-howard-chamblee-v-united-states-ca5-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack