United States v. Harrison Ross

963 F.2d 381 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harrison ROSS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-10284. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 12, 1992. * Decided May 14, 1992. Before CHOY, HUG and RYMER, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM ** Harrison Ross was convicted of involuntary manslaughter committed on the Navajo Indian Reservation. Ross appeals on the ground that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the results of a blood alcohol test administered by an Indian Health Services doctor, Joseph Magee. We affirm. Ross claims that the blood alcohol test was administered in violation of his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures because his consent was not voluntary, and the blood sample was not taken for a medical purpose but only to assist a government investigation. The district court found that after taking one sample, the doctor, who was employed by…