UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
JACK M. DIXON, JOHN THUR BYLUND AND HOWARD C. ARNOLD, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
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 search was constitutional and affirmed the convictions.
A border patrol agent stopped a vehicle to check citizenship, saw marijuana seeds with a flashlight, and the occupants offered marijuana they possesse…
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 Plain View Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
As with United States v. Hart, 525 F. 2d 1199 (5th Cir. 1976) this case was remanded to us by the United States Supreme Court for consideration in light of United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 95 S.Ct. 2574, 45 L.Ed.2d 607 (1975), and United States v. Ortiz, 422 U.S. 891, 95 S.Ct. 2585, 45 L.Ed.2d 623 (1975). On the basis of our decision today in Hart, we again hold this search to be constitutional and affirm the convictions of the three defendants.
Moreover, the facts of this case provide an alternative basis for affirming the convictions. Here, after stopping the vehicle in which the defendants were traveling for the purpose of determining the occupant’s citizenship, a border patrol agent looked through the vehicle’s window with his flashlight and noticed what appeared to be marijuana seeds. At this point, one of the three men asked the agent if he would let them go if they gave him the marijuana they had for their personal use. A subsequent search of the vehicle produced approximately 60 pounds of marijuana.
In United States v. Santibanez, 517 F. 2d 922 (5th Cir. 1975), this Court held that a vehicle could be stopped at a permanent checkpoint for the purpose of determining the occupant’s citizenship. Accord, United States v. Coffey, 520 F. 2d 1103 (5th Cir. 1975). This is the procedure utilized in this case. Once the vehicle was stopped, the plain view of the marijuana seeds in the car gave the border patrol officer probable cause to then conduct the search. The fact that the agent used a flashlight to bring the marijuana into view, does not preclude such observation from application of the “plain view doctrine.” United States v. Lara, 517 F. 2d 209 (5th Cir. 1975).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Hart, 525 F.2d 1199 (5th Cir. 1976)
-
United States v. Valentine Kalie, 538 F.2d 1201 (5th Cir. 1976)
-
United States v. Kidd, 540 F.2d 210 (5th Cir. 1976)
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
- United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (U.S. 1975)
- United States v. Ortiz, 422 U.S. 891 (U.S. 1975)
- United States v. Hart, 525 F.2d 1199 (5th Cir. 1976)
- United States v. Lara, 517 F.2d 209 (5th Cir. 1975)
- Muhammad Temple OF Islam OF Shreveport v. City OF Shreveport, 517 F.2d 922 (5th Cir. 1975)
- United States v. Santibanez, 517 F.2d 922 (5th Cir. 1975)
- United States v. Coffey, 520 F.2d 1103 (5th Cir. 1975)