United States v. Jesse Vance Mehciz

Mehciz was convicted after a jury trial for possession of 12,000 ■ tablets of LSD for sale in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 331 (q) (3) (A), 333(b) (1), and 360a (c) (1). We affirm.

I. THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND.

On September 29, 1969, Arthur Fluhr, Special Agent of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, received information from a reliable informant that a large shipment of LSD was being carried from southern California to Phoenix the next day. Fluhr’s informant supplied the first name (Vance) of the person who would be carrying the drugs as well as the airline, flight number and arrival time, and described him as a white male about six feet tall, wearing long dark hair and missing a front tooth.

Fluhr and other federal officers met the flight on its arrival. They stood near the gate and watched the deplaning passengers until they spotted the appellant Mehciz who fit the description they had been given. The officers allowed Mehciz to pass through the gate and past them when Fluhr called, “Hey, Vance!” at which Mehciz turned around and looked at Fluhr.

Mehciz was immediately placed under arrest. When arrested, he was carrying a small gray overnight suitcase. The officers took…

(dissenting):

I respectfully dissent. As I see it, the majority, falling back upon an eleven-year-old decision of the Supreme Court, essentially disregards the more recent teaching of Chimel v. California, 395 U. S. 752 , 89 S.Ct. 2034 , 23 L.Ed.2d 685 (1969). In Chimel , we were quite clearly told that a warrantless search is impermissible except as it may be reasonably necessary to protect the safety of the arresting officers, or to preserve evidence from possible destruction. Here, the accused was handcuffed and arrested as soon as he stepped from the airplane. It is undeniable that he then, and thereafter, had no access to his suitcase. It is undeniable that the immediate search that followed his arrest was motivated neither by the possibility that the handbag or its contents constituted a threat to the officers, nor by the possibility that evidence contained therein was in danger of destruction.

The majority attempts to analogize Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970), which permitted a warrantless search of an automobile as an alternative to impoundment, when the automobile had been seized incident to a lawful arrest and there was probable…

437 F.2d 145 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesse Vance MEHCIZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 25868. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Jan. 11, 1971, Rehearing Denied Feb. 8, 1971. Philip Daigneault (argued), of Daigneault, Abel & Daigneault, Torrance, Cal., for defendant-appellant. Morton Sitver (argued), Asst. U.S. Atty., Richard K. Burke, U.S. Atty., Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiff-appellee. Before ELY and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges, and SMITH, District Judge. * EUGENE A. WRIGHT, Circuit Judge: 1 Mehciz was convicted after a jury trial for possession of 12,000 tablets of LSD for sale in violation of 21 U.S.C. 331(q)(3)(A), 333(b)(1), and 360a(c) (1). We affirm. 2 I. THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND. 3 On September 29, 1969, Arthur Fluhr, Special Agent of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, received information from a reliable informant that a large shipment of LSD was being carried from southern California to Phoenix the next day. Fluhr's informant supplied the first name (Vance) of the person who would be carrying the drugs as well as the airline, flight number and arrival time, and described him as a white male about six feet tall, wearing long dark…