Cavness

By unanimous jury verdict appellant was adjudged'guilty of purchasing cocaine and heroin not “in the original stamped package or from the original stamped package”. 53 Stat. 271 , (1939), as amended, 26 U.S.C.A. § 2553 (a). He brings this appeal, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 91 , 1291, designating as error four rulings of the district court.

The first claim is that eight capsules of cocaine were erroneously admitted in evidence since taken from appellant by means of unlawful search and seizure. It is settled that evidence obtained by federal officers as a result of unlawful search and seizure is inadmissible in the federal courts. Agnello v. United States, 1925, 269 U.S. 20, 33-34 , 46 S.Ct. 4 , 70 L.Ed. 145 ; U.S.Const.Amend. IV. But equally well established is the right of arresting officers, as an incident to lawful arrest, to search both the person of the accused and the place of arrest, in order to find and seize evidences of the crime. Agnello v. United States, supra, 269 U.S. at page 30 , 46 S.Ct. 4 ; Weeks v. United States, 1914, 232 U.S. 383, 392 , 34 S.Ct. 232 , 58 L.Ed. 652 .

In the case at bar, upon the filing of an affidavit stating that cocaine had been purchased from appellant…