United States v. Billy Ray Murray

Good Law
530 F.2d 856·1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 12591
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 3, 197674--2521California657 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hufstedler, J.

Murray appeals from his conviction for bank robbery. He claims error in the denial of his motion to suppress items obtained from a warrantless search of three suitcases and complains that the prosecutor commented upon his failure to testify. We affirm the conviction.

Murray and a codefendant, Wilson, were indicted and tried for the robbery of an Oakland bank. A third person, Willis, was indicted but not tried because he was a fugitive. The day before the robbery the trio and a fourth man, Taylor, left the Los Angeles area and spent the evening together in the apartment of Sharon McKee in Oakland. Wilson and Taylor thereafter spent the night in a motel, while Murray and Willis remained all night at McKee’s apartment. Wilson, Murray, and Willis each left a suitcase at the apartment.

At approximately 10:20 the next morning, three armed men wearing ski masks robbed the bank. Immediately afterward, a police officer saw a man wearing a ski mask and surgical gloves hurriedly enter a car that was waiting in front of the bank with a driver inside and the motor running. The car drove away rapidly amid gunfire from other police officers in pursuit. The officer then saw Murray…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.