Haerr v. United States, 16047.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
Citation240 F.2d 533
Docket NumberNo. 16047.,16047.
PartiesCharles Spencer HAERR, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
Decision Date16 January 1957

240 F.2d 533 (1957)

Charles Spencer HAERR, Appellant,
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 16047.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

January 16, 1957.

240 F.2d 534

John E. Fitzgibbon, Horace C. Hall, Laredo, Tex., Fitzgibbon, Goodwin & Gallagher, Laredo, Tex., for appellant.

L. Glen Kratochvil, Asst. U. S. Atty., Malcolm R. Wilkey, U. S. Atty., Houston, Tex., for appellee.

Before RIVES, TUTTLE and CAMERON, Circuit Judges.

CAMERON, Circuit Judge.

Haerr was convicted of unlawfully acquiring marihuana in violation of 26 U.S. C.A. § 4744 (a) and, this being his second similar offense, was fined and sentenced to eight years imprisonment. Upon trial by the Court appellant insisted that the contraband should not be allowed in evidence as it was obtained through illegal search and seizure. The only question here is whether there was in fact a search and seizure.

At approximately ten o'clock p. m. December 16, 1955, Haerr, seated alone in the back seat of his automobile and being accompanied by two companions, one of whom was driving, in the front seat, was stopped by two Immigration (Border) Patrol Inspectors1 about fourteen miles from the border at a checking station. The officers began their routine investigation to determine the citizenship of the occupants. Near the outset of this investigation Inspector Seeburger shined his flashlight into the back seat and noticed appellant hunched over two boxes on the floor, apparently attempting to hide them.

The Inspector asked: "What is in the boxes? Let's pull over to the side, please," whereupon the automobile was suddenly and rapidly driven away. The Border Patrol Inspectors gave chase and observed two boxes being thrown from the right side of the automobile approximately five hundred yards from the checking station. Successfully apprehending the trio after a few miles' chase, the Inspectors were told voluntarily by appellant that the boxes and contents were his and that he had thrown them

240 F.2d 535
from the car, and that his companions were strangers and in no way involved. Returning to the place where the boxes were thrown, they were picked up and found to contain marihuana, as appellant freely admitted

Appellant, in his argument to exclude the marihuana as evidence, takes the position that an illegal search was instigated when Inspector Seeburger asked what was in the boxes and told the occupants of the automobile to pull over to the side. We cannot agree.

Appellant quotes...

To continue reading

Request your trial
81 cases
  • State v. Tully
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • March 5, 1974
    ...of guilt to be used in prosecution of a criminal action. The term implies exploratory investigation or quest.' Haerr v. United States, 240 F.2d 533, 535 (5th Cir.); United States v. Blackburn, 389 F.2d 93, 95 (6th Cir.); DiMarco v. Greene, 385 F.2d 556, 561 (6th Cir.); United States ex rel.......
  • United States v. Peltier 8212 2000, No. 73
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 25, 1975
    ...United States v. Bowen, 500 F.2d 960 (CA9), cert. granted, 419 U.S. 824, 95 S.Ct. 40, 42 L.Ed.2d 47 (1974). 9. Haerr v. United States, 240 F.2d 533 (1957); Ramirez v. United States, 263 F.2d 385 (1959); United States v. De Leon, 462 F.2d 170 (1972), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 853, 94 S.Ct. 76, ......
  • Marshall v. United States, 26037.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • January 22, 1970
    ...daylight or in artificial light."); see Safarik v. United States, 8 Cir. 1933, 62 F.2d 892, 895; cf. Haerr v. United States, 5 Cir. 1957, 240 F.2d 533. Notwithstanding the abundant authority contrary to his position, Marshall contends that the use of a flashlight in the present case convert......
  • State v. Rewolinski, 88-2312-CR
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • December 20, 1990
    ...Page 410 implies exploratory investigation or quest.' " Dombrowski, 44 Wis.2d at 495, 171 N.W.2d 349, quoting Haerr v. United States, 240 F.2d 533, 535 (5th Cir.1957). Thus, in this case, where the TDD printout and readout were at all times within view of the dispatcher, where the dispatche......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT