United States v. Robert Albert Chatman

573 F.2d 565 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Albert CHATMAN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 77-1455. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Dec. 1, 1977. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied Jan. 18, 1978. William J. Bender, (argued), Seattle, Wash., for defendant-appellant. Harry J. McCarthy, Asst. U.S. Atty., (argued), Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff-appellee. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Before MERRILL and TRASK, Circuit Judges, and TAKASUGI, * District Judge. PER CURIAM: 1 The district court, sitting without a jury convicted Chatman of possession with intent to distribute heroin in violation of Title 21, United States Code, §§ 841 (a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A). We affirm. 2 Chatman argues that the evidence received at trial was obtained as the result of an unlawful search and seizure. We find the facts discussed below sufficient to establish probable cause to arrest Chatman, thereby making the search one incident to a valid arrest. The facts, which must be viewed in the light most favorable to the government, United States v. Vital-Padilla, 500 F.2d 641, 642-43 (9th Cir. 1974), are as…

The district court, sitting without a jury convicted Chatman of possession with intent to distribute heroin in violation of Title 21, United States Code, §§ 841 (a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A). We affirm.

Chatman argues that the evidence received at trial was obtained as the result of an unlawful search and seizure. We find the facts discussed below sufficient to establish probable cause to arrest Chatman, thereby making the search one incident to a valid arrest. The facts, which must be viewed in the light most favorable to the government, United States v. Vital-Padilla, 500 F.2d 641, 642-43 (9th Cir. 1974), are as follows:

Appellant, the day prior to his early morning arrest, had purchased an airline ticket in Seattle for a short stay in San Francisco after failing to meet two other flight reservations, both of which also provided for a short layover. The ticket was purchased with cash taken from a roll of currency. Appellant traveled alone and carried no luggage, stating he would only be in San Francisco for an hour and a half. With this information, obtained from the airline ticket agent, an agent of the Drug Enforcement Agency directed surveillance of appellant in San…

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent.

This case addresses difficult issues relating to various stages of police activity ranging from investigation through final arrest. An understanding is required of the distinctions between probable cause for arrest and founded suspicion justifying an investigatory stop.

Although it is difficult for this court to place itself in the role of police officers who are required to make decisions and take action without the benefit of quiet reflection, the Fourth Amendment requires judicial intervention when police activity compromises the right of the people to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures. Terry v. Ohio condemns “judicial opinion[s] can comprehend the protean variety of the street encounter.” 392 U.S. 1, 15 , 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1876 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1967). Accordingly, search and seizure issues are to be decided on the facts of the particular case. Id. at 15, 30 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 .

Terry established that a police officer could stop and question a person upon less than probable cause for arrest. Such an investigatory “stop” is clearly within the Fourth Amendment language governing “seizures.” Id. at 16 . The Court balanced the…