United States v. Amado Martinez-Fuerte, United States of America v. Jose Jiminez-Garcia, United States of America v. Raymond Rangel Guillen and Fernando Medrano-Barragan

514 F.2d 308 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Amado MARTINEZ-FUERTE, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jose JIMINEZ-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellee. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Raymond Rangel GUILLEN and Fernando Medrano-Barragan, Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 74-2462, 74-2680 and 74-2714. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. March 5, 1975. Charles M. Sevilla, Frank M. Mangan, Federal Public Defenders, San Diego, Cal. (argued), for defendants-appellants. Jack Robinson, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), for plaintiff-appellee. Before DUNIWAY and CARTER, Circuit Judges and WEIGEL, * District Judge. OPINION DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: 1 These consolidated appeals question the constitutionality of stops and immigration inspections, without probable cause or founded suspicion, of vehicles passing through the San Clemente traffic checkpoint, as operated by the United States Border Patrol under an inspection warrant issued by a United States magistrate. We hold that the warrant is invalid and that the checkpoint operations which it purports to authorize violate the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. 2 I. The Facts. 3…