UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Forrest GORMAN, Defendant-Appellee

Good Law
104 F.3d 272·96 Daily Journal DAR 15647·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 33865·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9521
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 30, 199695-10410California1,537 words

Opinion

Opinion

Trott, J.

The issue raised in this appeal is whether a search warrant authorizing the search of a residence also authorizes without so stating the search of the residence’s curtilage. We hold that it does.

BACKGROUND

Hawaiian law enforcement officers were told by an informant that Forrest Gorman was selling marijuana from inside an old and immobile bus located on Gorman’s property. Gorman was using the bus as a residence. In order to corroborate the informant’s story, the officers asked him to purchase marijuana from Gorman while the officers watched from a distance. The informant agreed, and based upon the information gathered from ensuing controlled purchases, the officers obtained a warrant authorizing a search of the bus for marijuana, other controlled substances, drug paraphernalia, and related records. The warrant stated in pertinent part:

YOU ARE COMMANDED TO SEARCH:

Approximately nineteen. law enforcement officers executed-the warrant. Agent Robin Dinlocker, who was assigned during the search to secure the perimeter of the property, noticed a large plastic translucent jar partly buried beside some lawn chairs outside the bus-residence. Dinlocker picked up and opened the jar. In…

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.