UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
VICTOR MANUEL CAMPOS, 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 a vehicle stop at a permanent immigration checkpoint is valid without suspicion, and the odor of marihuana provides probable cause for a search.
During a secondary inspection at a permanent immigration checkpoint, a border agent detected the odor of marihuana emanating from the appellant's vehi…
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 Border Search Exception cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Victor M. Campos appeals from a judgment of conviction for violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960 and 963, illegal importation of a controlled substance, and for violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute. We affirm.
On December 15, 1971, appellant’s vehicle was referred to secondary inspection at the regular San Clemente checkpoint. When the agent approached the vehicle to ascertain citizenship of the occupants, he detected the odor of marihuana. A subsequent search of the vehicle revealed several concealed kilos of marihuana in the car. The stop and the brief detention of the vehicle at an authorized immigration vehicle checkpoint were valid without regard to either an articulable basis for suspicion of illegal conduct or probable cause. United States v. Aranda, 457 F. 2d 761 (9th Cir. 1972); Fernandez v. United States, 321 F. 2d 283 (9th Cir. 1963). When the agent detected the odor of marihuana, he then had probable cause to conduct the search. Fumagalli v. United States, 429 F. 2d 1011 (9th Cir. 1970).
Campos argues that an observation of his car by different agents two hours before the checkpoint encounter provided the agents no foundation for a stop or detention. We do not reach the question because, even if he were right, the Government did not need that justification to validate the stop or the brief detention made in this case.
Judgment affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Porter v. State, 302 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
-
Robbins v. California, 453 U.S. 420 (U.S. 1981)
-
United States v. Bowen, 500 F.2d 960 (9th Cir. 1974)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fernandez v. United States, 321 F.2d 283 (9th Cir. 1963)
- Fumagalli v. United States, 429 F.2d 1011 (9th Cir. 1970)
- United States v. Aranda, 457 F.2d 761 (9th Cir. 1972)