United States v. Howard Ellsworth Armpriester, A/K/A Guy B. Armpriester

416 F.2d 28
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 9, 1969
Docket12047_1
StatusPublished

This text of 416 F.2d 28 (United States v. Howard Ellsworth Armpriester, A/K/A Guy B. Armpriester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth 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. Howard Ellsworth Armpriester, A/K/A Guy B. Armpriester, 416 F.2d 28 (4th Cir. 1969).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Finding no substance in this appeal, we decline to hear oral argument and we affirm.

Defendant’s arrest, pursuant to a warrant charging mail fraud the validity of which is not questioned, justified an examination of the packages that he was carrying at the time of arrest. Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 87 S.Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782 (1967); Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 89 S.Ct. 2034, 23 L.Ed.2d 685 (1969). Because the search was incident to a valid arrest and not unreasonable in scope, there was no error in the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress the incriminating evidence which was uncovered and used at his trial.

We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of defendant’s request for a fourth continuance, and the evidence was quite sufficient to submit the ease to the jury and to enable it to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was guilty.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden
387 U.S. 294 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Chimel v. California
395 U.S. 752 (Supreme Court, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
416 F.2d 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-howard-ellsworth-armpriester-aka-guy-b-armpriester-ca4-1969.