Fields v. United States
| Decision Date | 04 March 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 22158.,22158. |
| Citation | Fields v. United States, 355 F.2d 543 (5th Cir. 1966) |
| Parties | Loy Duane FIELDS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Robert B. Thompson, Gainesville, Ga., for appellant.
Bobby C. Milam, Thomas K. McWhorter, Asst. U. S. Attys., Atlanta, Ga., Charles L. Goodson, U. S. Atty., for appellee.
Before GEWIN and BELL, Circuit Judges, and HUGHES, District Judge.
Appellant was convicted for violations of 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 5205(a)(2),5601(a)(1),5601(a)(4),5601(a)(8).The contention that the revenue agent violated 18 U.S.C.A. § 3109 by his entry into the building which housed the incriminating evidence is without merit.The building in question, which housed one of the largest illicit distilleries the officers had ever seen, was not within the curtilage.It was three hundred feet in length and was constructed for commercial use in the chicken industry.
The denial of the motion to suppress the evidence seized in the building was therefore correct.Moreover, there was ample basis for the issuance of the search warrant.
Affirmed.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
7 cases
-
US v. Conley
...States v. Case, 435 F.2d 766, 770 n. 1 (7th Cir.1970); and, e.g., United States v. Lopez, 898 F.2d 1505, 1511 (1990); Fields v. United States, 355 F.2d 543 (5th Cir.), cert. dismissed, 384 U.S. 935, 86 S.Ct. 1452, 16 L.Ed.2d 536 (1966); see also United States v. Little, 753 F.2d 1420 (9th C......
-
U.S. v. Agrusa
...case to accept or reject this additional proposition.21 United States v. Johns, 466 F.2d 1364, 1365 (5th Cir. 1972); Fields v. United States, 355 F.2d 543 (5th Cir. 1966), cert. dismissed, 384 U.S. 935, 86 S.Ct. 1452, 16 L.Ed.2d 536 (1966); United States v. Hassell, 336 F.2d 684, 686 (6th C......
-
United States v. Wylie
...by the Fourth Amendment do not violate Section 3109. See United States v. Mullin, 329 F.2d 295, 298-299 (4th Cir. 1964); Fields v. United States, 355 F.2d 543 (5th Cir.), cert. dismissed, 384 U.S. 935, 86 S.Ct. 1452, 16 L.Ed.2d 536 (1966); Brooks v. United States, 263 A. 2d 45, 46-47 (D.C.A......
-
People v. Bruce
...329 F.2d 295, 298--299 (small smokehouse located 75 feet from main residence; knock had notice statute applicable); Fields v. United States (5th Cir. 1966) 355 F.2d 543, cert. dismissed 384 U.S. 935, 86 S.Ct. 1452, 16 L.Ed.2d 536 (commercial chicken house outside curtilage; statute Admitted......
Get Started for Free