United States v. Noah Willis Altizer, AKA Robert Van Horn

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Noah Willis Altizer, AKA Robert Van Horn

477 F.2d 846, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10038

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 8, 1973

Docket72-3680

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 477 F.2d 846 (United States v. Noah Willis Altizer, AKA Robert Van Horn) 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

United States v. Noah Willis Altizer, AKA Robert Van Horn, 477 F.2d 846, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10038 (5th Cir. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant attacks the basis of a search warrant. His ground for attack is that the affidavit supporting the warrant was based on information obtained from his purported wife after her arrest without probable cause. He asserts the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. The search was of a trailer-home occupied by appellant and his purported wife. 1 The district court held that appellant lacked standing to assert in his own defense the defalcation of the officers toward the wife. We agree. See Alderman v. United States (1969) 394 U.S. 165, 174, 89 S.Ct. 961, 22 L.Ed.2d 176, 187; Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 371 U.S. 471, 491-492, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441, 458.

The assignments of error based on the alleged illegal arrest of appellant and the search of his automobile are without merit. No product of the arrest was used against appellant in connection with his trial and conviction. The evidence obtained from the search of appel-) lant’s automobile was not improperly admitted. The automobile was not searched at the time of appellant’s illegal arrest, but only upon a search war-, rant which was issued on information also obtained from appellant’s purported wife.

Affirmed.

1

. The district court found that the purported wife was not in fact appellant’s wife but that they were occupying the trailer-home together.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant attacks the basis of a search warrant. His ground for attack is that the affidavit supporting the warrant was based on information obtained from his purported wife after her arrest without probable cause. He asserts the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. The search was of a trailer-home occupied by appellant and his purported wife. 1 The district court held that appellant lacked standing to assert in his own defense the defalcation of the officers toward the wife. We agree. See Alderman v. United States (1969) 394 U.S. 165, 174, 89 S.Ct. 961, 22 L.Ed.2d 176, 187; Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 371 U.S. 471, 491-492, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441, 458.

The assignments of error based on the alleged illegal arrest of appellant and the search of his automobile are without merit. No product of the arrest was used against appellant in connection with his trial and conviction. The evidence obtained from the search of appel-) lant’s automobile was not improperly admitted. The automobile was not searched at the time of appellant’s illegal arrest, but only upon a search war-, rant which was issued on information also obtained from appellant’s purported wife.

Affirmed.

1

. The district court found that the purported wife was not in fact appellant’s wife but that they were occupying the trailer-home together.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

477 F.2d 846, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10038, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-noah-willis-altizer-aka-robert-van-horn-ca5-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack