United States v. Charles Vernon Pugh

Good Law
35 F.3d 573·1994 WL 502620·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 32411
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 13, 199493-30443California476 words

Opinion

Opinion

35 F.3d 573 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Charles Vernon PUGH, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-30443. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 2, 1994. Decided Sept. 13, 1994. Before: WRIGHT, KOZINSKI and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 1. Although the marijuana odor and root balls were detected near the barn on Pugh's property, they were properly considered in determining probable cause because the barn was outside the residential curtilage. The barn was 100 feet from the house, the barn and house were not surrounded by a single enclosure, the property was not fully fenced or shielded from the observation of passersby, and the barn neither was, nor was believed by the police to be, used for intimate personal activities. United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294, 301 (1987) (listing factors determining scope of residential curtilage). Moreover, if there was no invasion of…

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.