U.S. v. Grissett, PEREZ-RODRIGUE

Decision Date19 February 1991
Docket NumberD,PEREZ-RODRIGUE,Nos. 90-5033,90-5036,s. 90-5033
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Isaac Christopher GRISSETT, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Julioefendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Michael Morchower, argued (S. Hunter Woltz, on brief), Morchower, Luxton & Whaley, Richmond, Va., for appellant Grissett.

Harry L. Hobgood, Asst. U.S. Atty., argued (Robert H. Edmunds, Jr., U.S. Atty., on brief), Greensboro, N.C., for appellee.

Danny T. Ferguson, on brief, Peebles, Schramm & Ferguson, Winston-Salem, N.C., for appellant Perez-Rodriguez.

Before PHILLIPS and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and MERHIGE, Senior District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

Both appellants challenge the validity of the search of their motel room and appellant Grissett contests the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. We affirm both convictions.

I.

On July 22, 1989, officers from the Winston-Salem Police Department received a call from a local motel stating that a man was in the lobby with a gun. When police arrived, a motel employee pointed to Anthony Massey as the subject of the call. A pat-down of Massey yielded a revolver and ammunition. When Massey could not produce any identification, a police officer asked Massey if anyone in the area could identify him. Massey responded that an individual in room 523, where Massey had been, could identify him.

After a surveillance of room 523, uniformed police officers knocked on the room door to determine if anyone there could identify Massey. Before appellant Issac Grissett opened the door, the officers identified themselves as police officials. An officer next asked if he could speak with the person in whose name the room was registered. Grissett responded by stepping into the hallway, leaving the door ajar. Through the open door, the officers could see three other individuals, including appellant Julio Perez-Rodriguez. The officers, after asking Grissett a few questions, smelled the odor of marijuana wafting through the open doorway of room 523. The police then entered the room and found marijuana and crack cocaine lying on furniture around the room. Also, an officer discovered a paper bag containing 69.3 grams of crack cocaine on the balcony of the adjacent motel room approximately seven feet from room 523's balcony. Police arrested the room's occupants.

Grissett and Perez-Rodriguez filed motions to suppress the evidence seized from the motel, contending that the warrantless search of the room violated the Fourth Amendment. The district court denied these motions. Grissett and Perez-Rodriguez were then tried and convicted of conspiring to possess cocaine base with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. Secs. 841 & 846. Perez-Rodriguez was also convicted on two other drug related charges. Grissett and Perez-Rodriguez now appeal the court's suppression ruling and Grissett challenges the sufficiency of the evidence underlying his conviction.

II.

The warrantless entry of the motel room was proper if the police had probable cause to believe contraband was present and exigent circumstances existed. United States v. Turner, 650 F.2d 526, 528 (4th Cir.1981). Appellants...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 cases
  • Norman v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • March 27, 2017
    ...In addition to Patterson and Lark , the State brings to our attention the distinguishable case of United States v. Grissett , 925 F.2d 776, 778 (4th Cir. 1991) (per curiam), in which the Fourth Circuit held that exigent circumstances existed where law enforcement officers smelled marijuana ......
  • Barocio v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • June 19, 2003
    ...that a suspect would attempt to dispose of the evidence before the police could return with a warrant. See United States v. Grissett, 925 F.2d 776, 778 (4th Cir.1991). Appellant's awareness of the authorities, coupled with the ease with which small amounts of narcotics can be destroyed, est......
  • United States v. Harvey
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of West Virginia
    • October 25, 2012
    ...States v. Taylor, 90 F.3d 903, 907 (4th Cir.1996); United States v. Turner, 650 F.2d 526, 528 (4th Cir.1981); United States v. Grissett, 925 F.2d 776, 778 (4th Cir.1991); United States v. Moss, 963 F.2d 673, 679–680 (4th Cir.1992); and United States v. Reid, 929 F.2d 990, 993–994 (4th Cir.1......
  • State v. Moore
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • September 20, 2000
    ...See United States v. Wilson (C.A.1, 1994), 36 F.3d 205; United States v. Fields (C.A.2, 1997), 113 F.3d 313; United States v. Grissett (C.A.4, 1991), 925 F.2d 776; United States v. Gaitan—Acevedo (C.A.6, 1998), 148 F.3d 577; United States v. Parris (C.A.8, 1994), 17 F.3d Here, Sergeant Gree......
  • 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