United States v. Kenneth Carl Troise, Pedro Iguaran, Tracy Lee Maudlin, John Linn Jeppesen, Civ. A. Nos. 84-5171, 84-5175, 84-5219 and 84-5220

Good Law
796 F.2d 310·1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 27836
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 7, 1986310California1,464 words

Opinion

Opinion

Canby, J.

Kenneth Troise, Pedro Iguaran, Tracy Maudlin and John Jeppesen appeal their convictions, following a court trial on stipulated facts, for importation of and possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a), 960(a), 841(a)(1). We affirm.

I. Boarding of the FLEETSPOINT by the Coast Guard

Defendants first object to the boarding and inspection by the Coast Guard of their ship, the FLEETSPOINT. The boarding and inspection were proper.

Our cases make clear that the daytime boarding of a vessel on the high seas for the purpose of conducting a document and safety inspection does not violate the fourth amendment even though the boarding was conducted without a warrant or probable cause. E.g., United States v. Cilley, 785 F.2d 651, 653 (9th Cir.1985); United States v. Humphrey, 759 F.2d 743, 746 (9th Cir.1985).

Defendants argue that the boarding here was not conducted pursuant to an administrative plan that sufficiently limited Coast Guard officers’ discretion concerning which vessels to board and inspect. They rely on our decision in United States v. Piner, 608 F.2d 358 (9th Cir.1979). Their reliance is misplaced.

First, the boarding…

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.