United States v. James Walter Clark

James Walter Clark appeals from the judgment convicting him of concealing and facilitating the transportation and concealment of marihuana. 21 U.S.C. § 176a.

I. The admissibility of the marihuana.

The district judge, following a hearing, denied Clark’s pretrial motion to suppress some 340# of marihuana discovered by the officer in the trunk of the automobile Clark was driving at the time of his arrest; additionally, the court overruled at the trial Clark’s objection to the introduction into evidence of the marihuana and all testimony concerning it.

Neither ruling constituted error. The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to establish that the search of the vehicle was incident to a valid arrest of Clark and that it was reasonable. Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 , 89 S.Ct. 2034 , 23 L.Ed.2d 685 (1969).

The district judge, having made a pretrial determination on the issue, was not obliged to again consider it during trial and before ruling upon Clark’s objection to the introduction of evidence. Such is the import of Rule 41(e) F.R. Crim.P., and nothing appeared or was shown to avoid its application. Solomon v. United States, 133 U.S.App.D.C. 103 , 408 F.2d 1306,…