UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
JOHN RONALD HUFSTETLER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

5th Cir. | 1974-07-03
No. 73-2927
496 F.2d 1184 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1974) Positive Treatment
Cited by 10 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the facts and circumstances of the apprehension fell within a prior circuit decision, warranting affirmance.


Facts & Procedural History

A marijuana apprehension occurred at a permanent border patrol checkpoint on Interstate Highway 10 near Sierra Blanca, Texas, on March 16, 1973. The d…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

This marijuana apprehension occurred at a permanent border patrol checkpoint situated on Interstate Highway 10, approximately three miles west of Sierra Blanca, Texas.1 The appre hension occurred on March 16, 1973. On June 21, 1973, the Supreme Court decided Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266, 93 S.Ct. 2535, 37 L.Ed.2d 596. Almeida-Sanchez is to be given only prospective application, U. S. v. Miller, 5 Cir., 1974, 492 F. 2d 37.

We find the facts and circumstances of this appeal, in which the District Court declined to suppress the evidence, to fall clearly within our decision in U. S. v. Merla, 5 Cir., 1974, 493 F. 2d 910. In that case, the denial of a motion to suppress was affirmed. The same result necessarily follows here.2

Affirmed.

. Sierra Blanca is approximately fifteen miles north of the Mexican border and about seventy-five miles southeast of El Paso. There is no road directly connecting Sierra Blanca with the Mexican boundary, but this was a permanent checkpoint.

. Appellant filed a motion to strike certain portions of the government’s brief, correctly asserting that it contained statements of fact not presented or heard in the court below when considering the motion to suppress. The objectionable material played no part in our decision of this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw