United States v. John Eldon Beck, United States of America v. John W. Dickerson

Bad Law
598 F.2d 497·1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 14225
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 6, 197977-2453, 77-2533California11,216 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Anderson, J.

In a trial without a jury, appellants Beck and Dickerson were convicted, respectively, of possession of cocaine and of possession of heroin, with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). On appeal, they challenge as erroneous the denial of their motions to suppress evidence seized. We reverse.

FACTS

At about 9:00 in the evening of Tuesday, March 8,1977, three men entered the pedestrian gate at the Grand Avenue border entrance to Nogales, Arizona. Larry Swanson, a Customs Inspector on duty at the gate, stopped the men and, as was his routine, asked if they were U.S. citizens, if they had purchased anything, how long they had been in Mexico, and what they had been doing there. They responded that they were U.S. citizens, had been drinking 3 or 4 hours in Mexico and had made no purchases. Swanson smelled alcohol and thought the men appeared slightly inebriated. Upon request the men produced their drivers’ licenses and identified themselves as John Beck, John Dickerson, and Dan McDowell, all from Missouri. Swanson noticed that Dickerson’s hands were trembling and that he appeared to be nervous. He felt it was unusual that the men, although being from out of…

Dissenting Opinion

Wallace, J.

dissenting:

I cannot agree that the factual findings made by the district judge as to what occurred on March 12, 1977, were clearly erroneous. The arrest issue constitutes one of those close questions which makes deciding difficult. While I am in harmony with many parts of the majority opinion of my brothers, I am convinced that the test established for determining when an arrest occurs is faulty. Even applying that test, the closeness of the issue causes me to support the factual determination of the district judge. Therefore, I must respectfully dissent.

I

The district judge, after listening to and carefully weighing all of the evidence, came to the conclusion that this was a proper investigatory stop. That is, that there was a founded or reasonable suspicion present which allowed the customs officers to stop the taxi. See United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 884 , 95 S.Ct. 2574 , 45 L.Ed.2d 607 (1975) (officers need reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle); United States v. Rocha-Lopez, 527 F.2d 476, 477 (9th Cir. 1975) (founded suspicion and reasonable suspicion are substantially the same); Wilson v. Porter, 361 F.2d 412, 415 (9th Cir. 1966) (brief detention valid…

Opinion

598 F.2d 497 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Eldon BECK, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John W. DICKERSON, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 77-2453, 77-2533. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. June 6, 1979. S. Jeffrey Minker, Tucson, Ariz., for defendants-appellants. Dale A. Danneman, Asst. U. S. Atty., Tucson, Ariz., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Before WALLACE and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAMS, * District Judge. J. BLAINE ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: 1 In a trial without a jury, appellants Beck and Dickerson were convicted, respectively, of possession of cocaine and of possession of heroin, with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). On appeal, they challenge as erroneous the denial of their motions to suppress evidence seized. We reverse. FACTS 2 At about 9:00 in the evening of Tuesday, March 8, 1977, three men entered the pedestrian gate at the Grand Avenue border entrance to Nogales, Arizona. Larry Swanson, a Customs Inspector on duty at the gate, stopped the men and, as was his routine, asked if they were U.S.…

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.