United States v. Sullivan, 73-2769. Summary Calendar.
| Citation | 488 F.2d 138 |
| Decision Date | 12 December 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 73-2769. Summary Calendar.,73-2769. Summary Calendar. |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ed SULLIVAN, Jr., and Kim Sullivan, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
Joseph S. Chagra, Lee A. Chagra, El Paso, Tex., for defendants-appellants.
William Sessions, U. S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., Ronald F. Ederer, Asst. U. S. Atty., El Paso, Tex., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before THORNBERRY, GOLDBERG and RONEY, Circuit Judges.
Defendants were convicted for knowingly and intentionally conspiring to import marijuana from Mexico into the United States. 21 U.S.C.A. § 963. On appeal, they challenge the legality of a search which produced the incriminating marijuana. Defendants, however, lack standing to object to the evidence as the product of an illegal search.
There is no standing to contest a search and seizure where, as here, the defendants: (a) were not on the premises at the time of the contested search and seizure; (b) alleged no proprietary or possessory interest in the premises; and (c) were not charged with an offense that includes, as an essential element of the offense charged, possession of the seized evidence at the time of the contested search and seizure.
Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223, 229, 93 S.Ct. 1565, 1569, 36 L.Ed.2d 208 (1973).
The search in this case was of a van which the defendants neither owned nor possessed at the time of the search. They likewise neither owned nor possessed the 322 pounds of marijuana discovered therein.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Capra
...223, 229, 93 S.Ct. 1565, 1569, 36 L.Ed.2d 208 (1973); see United States v. Pui Kan Lam, 483 F.2d 1202 (2 Cir. 1973); United States v. Sullivan, 488 F.2d 138 (5 Cir 1973); United States v. Hutchinson, 488 F.2d 484 (8 Cir. 1973). 3 These defendants were not charged with physical possession at......
-
U.S. v. Hunter
...United States v. Groner, 494 F.2d 499 (5th Cir. 1974); United States v. Palazzo, 488 F.2d 942 (5th Cir. 1974); United States v. Sullivan, 488 F.2d 138 (5th Cir. 1973).3 There are cases in which the exclusionary rule does apply but in which the police were acting in good faith and were not a......
-
U.S. v. Hunt
...search. United States v. McConnell, 5 Cir. 1974, 500 F.2d 347; United States v. Palazzo, 5 Cir. 1974, 488 F.2d 942; United States v. Sullivan, 5 Cir. 1973, 488 F.2d 138. In Jones, the Court also created the doctrine of 'automatic standing,' whereby, in a case where possession of the seized ......
-
U.S. v. Reyes
...used to convict a defendant of importation or conspiracy to import. We implicitly rejected such a notion in United States v. Sullivan, 5 Cir. 1973, 488 F.2d 138 (per curiam), where we found that defendants convicted of conspiring to import had no standing to object to a search of a van in w......