United States v. Brown, 71-1755.
| Decision Date | 12 April 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 71-1755.,71-1755. |
| Citation | 463 F.2d 949,150 US App. DC 113 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Reginald T. BROWN, Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Mr. Dorsey Evans, Washington, D. C. (appointed by this court) was on the brief for appellant.
Messrs. Harold H. Titus, Jr., U. S. Atty., and John A. Terry, Roger E. Zuckerman, and Miss Ruth R. Banks, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief for appellee.
Before McGOWAN, LEVENTHAL and MacKINNON, Circuit Judges.
The sole issue in this appeal from a narcotics conviction (26 U.S.C.4704(a)) is the propriety of the District Court's denial of appellant's motion to suppress heroin capsules found in his possession.
On June 9, 1970, Metropolitan Police Officer Elijah Wade, on patrol in an area in which he had frequently observed what appeared to be narcotics transactions, saw appellant and another man alternately occupying a telephone booth without using the telephone. His suspicions aroused, Officer Wade approached the two men and identified himself. He noticed that appellant's eyes were glassy, and concluded, on the basis of his experience with addicts, that appellant was "high" on narcotics. The officer also noticed, protruding from appellant's shirt pocket, a cream-colored envelope of the type in which he had found narcotics on previous occasions.1 He seized the envelope, which the court ruled to have been in plain view, and examined its contents. Finding that it held 145 capsules containing a white powder, Officer Wade formally notified appellant that he was under arrest.
Even though a suspect has not formally been placed under arrest, a search of his person can be justified as incident to an arrest if an arrest is made immediately after the search, and if, at the time of the search, there was probable cause to arrest. Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 354, 389 F.2d 305 (1967). See also United States v. Gorman, 355 F.2d 151 (2d Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 1024, 86 S. Ct. 1962, 16 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1966). We conclude that Officer Wade had probable cause to arrest appellant at the time he removed the envelope from the latter's pocket.
A combination of four factors was sufficient to lead Officer Wade reasonably to believe that a narcotics offense was being committed by appellant. First, the place was "an area in which the police know that narcotics offenses frequently occur." United States v. Davis, 147 U.S.App.D.C. 400, 458 F.2d 819 (March 16, 1972). Officer Wade testified that he had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Prandy-Binett
...packet, United States v. Thomas, 551 F.2d 347, 348 (D.C.Cir.1976) (per curiam); a "cream-colored envelope," United States v. Brown, 463 F.2d 949, 950-51 (D.C.Cir.1972); and an unsealed brown envelope, United States v. Wheeler, 459 F.2d 1228, 1229 (D.C.Cir.1972). See also United States v. Be......
-
U.S. v. Powell
...the formal arrest was postponed. Id. at 160. The final case cited in Rawlings involved a plain view seizure. In United States v. Brown, 463 F.2d 949 (D.C.Cir.1972), a police officer observed two men in a telephone both and suspected a drug transaction was taking place. The officer approache......
-
United States v. Lewis
...can lawfully precede the arrest. Rawlings , 448 U.S. at 111, 100 S.Ct. 2556 (citing, e.g. , United States v. Brown , 150 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 114–15, 463 F.2d 949, 950–51 (1972) (per curiam) (approving search incident to arrest where officer, who had probable cause to believe defendant was in ......
-
People v. Pierce
...arrest rather than vice-versa. See Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 354, 389 F.2d 305, 308 (1967); United States v. Brown, 150 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972). See also Cupp v. Murphy, 412 U.S. 291 (93 S.Ct. 2000, 36 L.Ed.2d 900) (1973); United States v. Gorman, 355 F.2d......