TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Eliseo Andrade

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eliseo ANDRADE, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Andrade, 545 F.2d 1032 (5th Cir. 1977)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
January 24, 1977
Docket
No. 76-2329
Judges
Ainsworth, Clark, Per Curiam, Ro-Ney
Citations
545 F.2d 10321977 U.S. App. LEXIS 10380

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Appellant’s vehicle was stopped for routine determination of citizenship at the permanent Border Patrol checkpoint 7 miles south of Falfurrias, Texas. During that questioning, the Border Patrolman noticed a strong odor of marihuana emanating from the vehicle. A search revealed 225 pounds of marihuana in the trunk.

This Court has previously held the checkpoint seven miles south of Falfurrias to be a permanent one.

United States v. McCrary, 5 Cir. 1976, 543 F.2d 554 ;

United States v. Garza, 5 Cir. 1976, 539 F.2d 381, 382 ;

United States v. Cantu, 5 Cir. 1974, 504 F.2d 387, 389 . Stopping vehicles at a permanent Border Patrol checkpoint to inquire into the occupants’ citizenship does not offend the Fourth Amendment or require á judicial warrant.

Sifuentes v. United States, aff’d sub nom.

United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, - U.S. -, 96 S.Ct. 3074 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1976). A search at a permanent checkpoint is valid, if, after stopping the vehicle, the Border Patrolman finds probable cause for the search.

United States v. Ortiz, 422 U.S. 891 , 95 S.Ct. 2585 , 45 L.Ed.2d 623 (1975);

United States v. Santibanez, 5 Cir. 1975, 517 F.2d 922 . The odor of marihuana emanating from appellant’s vehicle gave the officer probable cause to detain appellant and search his car.

United States v. McCrary, supra; United States v. Kidd, 5 Cir. 1976, 540 F.2d 210 ;

United States v. Garza, supra; United States v. Torres, 5 Cir. 1976, 537 F.2d 1299 .

In conformity with the requirements established by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), we have carefully considered this cause in its entirety, and conclude that there is no arguable merit in the appeal. It is therefore ordered that the motion filed by Kenneth L. Yarbrough for leave to withdraw as court-appointed counsel for appellant is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See Local Rule 20. See also United States v. Minor, 5 Cir. 1971, 444 F.2d 521 and United States v. Crawford, 5 Cir. 1971, 446 F.2d 1085 .

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1977: 21978: 41982: 11988: 119772026peak 1978 · 4

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.

Authorities cited 9

DepthCaseCited by
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) 83,798
United States v. Ortiz, 422 U.S. 891 (1975) 446
United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976) 1,657
United States v. Garza, 539 F.2d 381 (5th Cir. 1976) 11
United States v. McCrary, 543 F.2d 554 (5th Cir. 1976) 9
United States v. Torres, 537 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir. 1976) 22
United States v. Santibanez, 517 F.2d 922 (5th Cir. 1975) 21
United States v. Cantu, 504 F.2d 387 (5th Cir. 1974) 18
United States v. Kidd, 540 F.2d 210 (5th Cir. 1976) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list