United States v. Curtis Leroy Owens
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Curtis Leroy OWENS, Defendant-Appellant
Opinion
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.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 3 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(finding a search justified where "the officers acted in good faith to prevent further harm to [the defendant]")
-
(evidence that addict was caught in possession of 17-day supply of heroin held insufficient to convict him of possession with intent to distribute)
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.