United States v. Russell Eugene Scharf, United States of America v. Lionel Gilbert Coolidge

Good Law
608 F.2d 323
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 31, 197977-3080, 77-3148California1,668 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kennedy, J.

On April 25, 1977 a robbery took place at a federally insured bank in Cheney, Washington. Appellants were convicted of crimes related to that incident after a jury trial. Coolidge was found guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. § 3 (1976), accessory after the fact to bank robbery. He contends that unconstitutionally obtained statements made by him were used against him at trial and that the evidence was insufficient to convict him as an accessory to the crime. Scharf was found guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. § 371 (1976), conspiracy to commit bank robbery. His principal claim is that his conviction rested on evidence gathered during an unconstitutional search of his automobile.

On the morning of the robbery three men in an automobile stopped at the Farmers and Merchants Bank in Cheney. While one remained in the car, the two other men entered the bank and took $6,900 at gunpoint. The robbers put the money in briefcases and fled in the waiting car. A Cheney police officer was near the bank when the robbery was reported, and he followed the robbers’ car out of town until it disappeared from his view.

After losing sight of the escape car, the officer saw fresh tire tracks leading to a heavily…

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.