United States v. Alonzo Pena Caldera, United States of America v. Lois Virginia Caldera

421 F.2d 152, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 11171
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 19, 1970
Docket24145, 24146
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 421 F.2d 152 (United States v. Alonzo Pena Caldera, United States of America v. Lois Virginia Caldera) 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
United States v. Alonzo Pena Caldera, United States of America v. Lois Virginia Caldera, 421 F.2d 152, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 11171 (9th Cir. 1970).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Under the standards articulated in a series of cases from this court dealing with border searches of body cavities, 1 the Customs agents had sufficient indication of the presence of heroin to warrant subjecting Lois Virginia Caldera to an X-ray examination. Her refusal to submit to the X-ray and the fact that she was seen placing something in her mouth were sufficient to warrant a subsequent search of her mouth. No Fourth Amendment problem is presented.

Nor do we find a Fifth Amendment problem akin to that in Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165, 72 S.Ct. 205, 96 L.Ed. 183 (1952). The conduct of Mrs. Caldera required reasonable force to subdue her and to prevent her apparent attempt to swallow the evidence. See Blackford v. United States, 247 F.2d 745, 752 (9th Cir. 1957), cert. denied, 356 U.S. 914, 78 S.Ct. 672, 2 L.Ed.2d 586 (1958). We cannot say as matter of law that the force exerted was shocking or unreasonable under the circumstances.

The totality of the evidence was sufficient to present a jury question as to whether appellants were engaged in a joint enterprise.

As to both appellants judgment is affirmed.

1

. See, e. g., Huguez v. United States, 406 F.2d 366 (9th Cir. 1968) ; Henderson v. United States, 390 F.2d 805 (9th Cir. 1967).

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

Related

Webb v. City of Vancouver
W.D. Washington, 2020
United States v. Holloway
906 F. Supp. 1437 (D. Kansas, 1995)
State v. Thompson
505 N.W.2d 673 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1993)
Jones v. United States
620 A.2d 249 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1993)
State v. Victor
601 N.E.2d 648 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1991)
People v. Fulkman
235 Cal. App. 3d 555 (California Court of Appeal, 1991)
People v. Johnson
231 Cal. App. 3d 1 (California Court of Appeal, 1991)
United States v. Juan F. Torres
921 F.2d 196 (Eighth Circuit, 1990)
People v. Cappellia
208 Cal. App. 3d 1331 (California Court of Appeal, 1989)
United States v. Douglas Paul Aman
624 F.2d 911 (Ninth Circuit, 1980)
State v. Jacques
587 P.2d 861 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1978)
State v. Jacques
579 P.2d 146 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1978)
United States v. Peterson
455 F.2d 519 (Ninth Circuit, 1972)
Daniel William Alesi v. Walter E. Craven
446 F.2d 742 (Ninth Circuit, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
421 F.2d 152, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 11171, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-alonzo-pena-caldera-united-states-of-america-v-lois-ca9-1970.