James v. United States

• Decision Date: 12 July 1960
• Docket Number: No. 16220.,16220.
• Parties: Leland Woodrow JAMES, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

280 F.2d 443 (1960)

Leland Woodrow JAMES, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 16220.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

July 12, 1960.

Michael J. Bogutski, Kansas City, Mo., made argument in behalf of the appellant. Alvin D. Shapiro, Kansas City, Mo., on the brief.

Horace Warren Kimbrell, Asst. U. S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., made oral argument for appellee. Edward L. Scheufler, U. S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., on the brief.

Before WOODROUGH and MATTHES, Circuit Judges, and MICKELSON, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

By information, appellant was charged under Title 26 U.S.C.A. § 5851 with possession of an unregistered firearm, he was found guilty by a jury, was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years, and has appealed.

The crucial question is whether the court erred in permitting the unregistered shotgun to be received in evidence over timely objection that the weapon had been seized by officers of the State of Missouri as the result of an illegal search, thereby rendering the evidence inadmissible. It stands conceded that federal officers did not participate in the search of defendant's automobile which led to discovery and seizure of the weapon.

In overruling appellant's motion for judgment of acquittal, the Court announced that its action was predicated upon the ruling of this Court in Jones v. United States, 217 F.2d 381, observing that, although "there was an illegal search by the State officials and * * * the gun was obtained as a result of the search of the automobile * * * there is no evidence of any collusion between the federal and the State authorities in connection with the original arrest or the search and the Government adopted the case after the arrest had been made and in perfect good faith."

When the appeal was argued in this Court on September 15, 1959, we were aware that the Supreme Court had granted certiorari in Rios v. United States, 9 Cir., 256 F.2d 173, 359 U.S. 965, 79 S.Ct. 881, 3 L.Ed.2d 833, which presented a question identical to that before us, and shortly thereafter, on October 12, 1959, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in a similar case, Elkins v. United States, 9 Cir., 266 F.2d 588, 361 U.S. 810, 80 S.Ct. 61, 4 L.Ed.2d 58. We therefore elected to withhold our decision here until final determination of those two cases.

On June 27, 1960, opinions were handed down, in Elkins v. United States, 80 S.Ct. 1437, 1453, and Rios v. United States, 80 S.Ct. 1431, 1453, striking down the so-called "silver platter" doctrine whereby evidence illegally obtained by state officers was admissible in federal courts, so long as no federal officer was connected with the illegal search. The substance of the Supreme Court's rulings may be illustrated by the holding in the Elkins decision, wherein the Court stated, 80 S.Ct. at page 1447 "We hold that evidence obtained by state officers during a search which, if conducted by federal officers, would have violated the defendant's immunity from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible over the defendant...