TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Patrick Adim Ogueri

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patrick Adim OGUERI, Defendant-Appellant

United States v. Ogueri, 798 F.2d 452 (11th Cir. 1986)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
September 3, 1986
Docket
No. 85-6067
Judges
Godbold, Hill, Anderson
Citations
798 F.2d 4521986 U.S. App. LEXIS 29270
Summary
Non-Argument Calendar.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion — Hill

HILL, Circuit Judge:

Defendant Patrick Ogueri appeals from his conviction of cocaine-related offenses, claiming that (1) his detention and search were illegal and (2) his statements should have been suppressed for being made involuntarily and without a knowing waiver of his rights.

Ogueri, a Nigerian citizen in the United States on a student visa, arrived at Miami International Airport from Bolivia on July 31, 1984. He proceeded through the customs enclosure without incident and walked to an airline counter approximately twenty yards away. While in customs, Ogueri was observed by Inspector Ellis. On the basis of his observations and experience in narcotics seizures, Ellis followed Ogueri outside the customs enclosure, approached him at the airlines counter, questioned him about his trip and finally asked him to return to the customs enclosure. There Ogueri was searched again and the *453 agents located 661 grams of cocaine on his person.

Ogueri was advised of his Miranda rights and refused to waive them. Ogueri denied initiating any conversation and making any statements. Nevertheless, Inspector Lamelas testified that Ogueri asked him for help; Lamelas responded by saying that he could only report any cooperation by the appellant to the United States Attorney. Ogueri then made certain incriminatory statements.

1. The search, conducted after Ogueri had gone twenty yards beyond the customs enclosure, was valid as a search at the functional equivalent of the border.

See, e.g., United States v. Ramos, 645 F.2d 318, 320-21 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981) (search thirty minutes after defendant left customs enclosure and checked into airport hotel but had not gone to his room). This traveler had not been assimilated into the mainstream of domestic activity; the evidence is conclusive that the contraband he was carrying had crossed the border.

2. The trial judge did not err in finding that Ogueri’s statements were voluntarily made after he initiated the conversation.

AFFIRMED.

How later courts describe this case

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

1991: 31994: 219912026peak 1991 · 3

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 1

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Ramos, 645 F.2d 318 (5th Cir. 1981) 13

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