Lewis v. United States, 6610.
| Decision Date | 02 November 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 6610.,6610. |
| Citation | 352 F.2d 799 |
| Parties | Duke Lee LEWIS, a/k/a Lee D. Lewis, Defendant, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit |
S. Myron Klarfeld, Boston, Mass., for appellant.
Edward J. Lee, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom W. Arthur Garrity, Jr., U. S. Atty., was on brief, for appellee.
Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, HASTIE* and McENTEE, Circuit Judges.
Certiorari Granted January 31, 1966. See 86 S.Ct. 646.
Defendant, convicted of selling marihuana to a government agent who had misrepresented his identity, claims an unlawful search and seizure because, thus misled by the agent, he invited him to his home and there made the sales. The happy days for law violators that this claim would produce are not to be. This is not a case of a government agent gaining access for an apparently proper purpose in order to seize surreptitiously evidence of a prior crime, Gouled v. United States, 1921, 255 U. S. 298, 41 S.Ct. 261, 65 L.Ed. 647, but is one in which the agent was invited for precisely the purpose for which he went. Short of entrapment, not here maintainable, defendant can no more assert that he would not have opened the door to the agent than he can assert that he would not have made the sale. His reliance upon Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 1964, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977, is quite misplaced. United States v. Pasquinzo, 6 Cir., 1964, 334 F.2d 74.
Affirmed.
* Sitting by designation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lewis v. United States
...petitioner on both counts and imposed concurrent five-year penitentiary sentences. The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed, 352 F.2d 799, and we granted certiorari, 382 U.S. 1024, 86 S.Ct. 646, 15 L.Ed.2d Petitioner does not argue that he was entrapped, as he could not on the fa......
-
United States v. Jones
...to consider the correctness of the First Circuit's holding that such action was not an unlawful search and seizure, Lewis v. United States, 1 Cir., 352 F.2d 799 (1965). Since in this case no motion was made to suppress the narcotics and no objection was offered to their admission in evidenc......