United States v. Jiles Dalewin Johnson

Good Law
93 Daily Journal DAR 4418·990 F.2d 1129·1993 WL 100050·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 6989·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2579
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 7, 199390-50329California1,505 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

This appeal raises two questions. First, did an unlawful search and seizure occur, when a traveler’s luggage being held by the airline for transport on the next available flight was subjected to a dog sniff test by the DEA? Second, were references by the trial judge during voir dire to narcotics trafficking as a widespread scourge improper and prejudicial? We answer no to both questions and affirm the conviction.

I. Facts.

Five minutes before the flight was scheduled to leave LAX, appellant Johnson bought a one-way ticket to Kansas City for $209 cash. Two narcotics officers were watching, and saw him make the purchase. Johnson acted nervous and looked around, not particularly at the clock and departure information, but up and down the counter at people in the terminal. He asked several times whether his luggage would make the flight. The ticket agent told him that if it did not, it would be sent on a flight leaving two hours later. The agent had Johnson complete special luggage forms for people who check their luggage late.

The narcotics officers did not speak to or interfere with Johnson as he boarded his flight. He made his plane, which took off as scheduled at 5:20 p.m. At…

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.