United States v. Joe Willie Morgan

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Joe Willie Morgan

457 F.2d 811

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 28, 1972

Docket25680

StatusPublished

This text of 457 F.2d 811 (United States v. Joe Willie Morgan) 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. Joe Willie Morgan, 457 F.2d 811 (9th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of conviction in this case involving the smuggling and transporting of heroin into the United States is affirmed.

The heroin was actually carried across the border from Mexico into the United States in the underpants of one Janice High, who was accompanying Morgan at the time. Mrs. High testified for the government, and two witnesses corroborated portions of her story. There was nothing inherently improbable about her testimony. There was an adequate showing of knowledge.

Morgan asserts here that the search of Mrs. High which produced the heroin was improper because he says the customs man lacked “a real suspicion.” Assuming, arguendo, that the search of Mrs. High was illegal, Morgan made no motion to suppress the evidence produced by the search, and he voiced no adequate objection at the time the heroin was received in evidence. The objection made here for the first time, under the circumstances of this case, comes too late.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of conviction in this case involving the smuggling and transporting of heroin into the United States is affirmed.

The heroin was actually carried across the border from Mexico into the United States in the underpants of one Janice High, who was accompanying Morgan at the time. Mrs. High testified for the government, and two witnesses corroborated portions of her story. There was nothing inherently improbable about her testimony. There was an adequate showing of knowledge.

Morgan asserts here that the search of Mrs. High which produced the heroin was improper because he says the customs man lacked “a real suspicion.” Assuming, arguendo, that the search of Mrs. High was illegal, Morgan made no motion to suppress the evidence produced by the search, and he voiced no adequate objection at the time the heroin was received in evidence. The objection made here for the first time, under the circumstances of this case, comes too late.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

457 F.2d 811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-joe-willie-morgan-ca9-1972.