UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
CURTIS LEROY OWENS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the district court did not err in overruling the defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained via a stomach pump.
The defendant was convicted of possession of heroin after he resisted arrest, attempted to flee, and a stomach pump was used to extract the drug. The …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rochin V. California cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
The defendant, Owens, appeals from his non-jury conviction for possession of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 844(a).
There is no reason to explore the dimensions of “probable cause” in airport, arrests and searches. Here Owens voluntarily agreed to accompany Customs Security Officer Harris to the office of Customs Patrol Officer Castro. Apparently Owens panicked, knocked down Castro, put a cellophane package in his mouth, and began to run away. At this point there was probable cause to arrest Owens and remove the package from his mouth. It was heroin.
Owens cannot complain that his rights were violated by his being taken to a hospital where a stomach pump was used to extract heroin. At the time he appeared to be unconscious or semi-conscious and the officers acted in good faith to prevent further harm to him. This case bears no resemblance to Rochin v, California, 1952, 342 U.S. 165, 72 S.Ct. 205, 96 L.Ed. 183.
We hold, therefore, that the district court did not err in overruling the defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence. See Rener v. Beto, 5 Cir. 1971, 447 F. 2d 20.
The judgment is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Franklin, 728 F.2d 994 (8th Cir. 1984)
-
United States v. Dudley P. Hardy, 895 F.2d 1331 (11th Cir. 1990)
-
United States v. Harold, 531 F.2d 704 (5th Cir. 1976)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (U.S. 1952)
- Rener v. Beto, 447 F.2d 20 (5th Cir. 1971)