United States v. Kilgore

Decision Date27 October 1969
Docket NumberNo. 23848.,23848.
Citation418 F.2d 225
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jimmie Herman KILGORE, Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Frederick L. Hetter, III, San Diego, Cal., for appellant.

Edwin L. Miller, Jr., U. S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., Shelby R. Gott, Asst. U. S. Atty., for appellee.

Before ELY and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON, District Judge.*

ELY, Circuit Judge:

In the first two counts of a three-count indictment, Kilgore was charged with two offenses relating to his alleged transportation of certain drugs across the Mexican border into the United States. 18 U.S.C. § 545; 19 U.S.C. § 1459. In the third count he was charged with having forcibly interfered with a federal officer while the latter was engaged in the performance of his official duties. 18 U.S.C. § 2231. In a non-jury trial, Kilgore was acquitted of the offense charged in the third count and convicted of each of the two offenses alleged, respectively, in the first two counts. He appeals from the judgments of conviction.

Kilgore makes only one contention in support of his appeal, and he rests this contention principally upon Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263, 87 S.Ct. 1951, 18 L.Ed.2d 1178 (1967), and United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967). We have concluded that we cannot analogize the facts which are here presented with those which were before the Supreme Court in Gilbert and Wade; hence, we affirm.

The drugs in question were discovered during a border search of a rented vehicle which, at the time of its entry into the United States, was occupied by two persons, one male and one female. These individuals were first observed at the border by Immigration Inspector Robert J. Herrenbruck, an experienced officer who had then been employed by the immigration authorities for twenty-six years. After Inspector Herrenbruck had been told by the male occupant that the vehicle had been rented and that the key to the trunk had been lost, a socalled secondary inspection followed. In this inspection, the vehicle was searched by Customs Inspector Welsh, who discovered the contraband. The vehicle occupants were also observed at the secondary inspection station by one Emory, who, because of illness, could not be present during the trial.

The trial commenced on September 24, 1968. Prior thereto, on April 15, 1968, Inspector Herrenbruck had been shown two photographs of the appellant. These pictures were presented to Herrenbruck by a customs agent named Ahern, and Herrenbruck identified the photographs as depicting the driver of the vehicle in question. Subsequently, during the trial, Inspector Herrenbruck appeared as a witness for the prosecution and, over objection, positively identified Kilgore as having been the driver of the vehicle at the time of the search and seizure.

It is insisted that Herrenbruck's in-court identification of Kilgore was corrupted because of his having...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • United States v. Baxter
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 15 Abril 1974
    ...courts that the use of a single photograph identification procedure does not necessarily interject prejudice. United States v. Kilgore, 418 F. 2d 225 (9th Cir. 1969); Cox, supra. This is not a case in which the only photograph the witnesses saw was one of the defendant. Compare United State......
  • U.S. v. Sanders
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 24 Enero 1977
    ...States v. Cox, 428 F.2d 683, 686-87 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 881, 91 S.Ct. 127, 27 L.Ed.2d 120 (1970); United States v. Kilgore, 418 F.2d 225, 226 (9th Cir. 1969). See also United States v. Bothwell, 465 F.2d 217, 220 (9th Cir. 1972).7 Furthermore, the identifications clearly sati......
  • United States v. Cox
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • 29 Junio 1970
    ...him with the incident. Moreover, hair samples taken from the Buick bore the same characteristics as Cox's hair. In United States v. Kilgore, 418 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1969), the defendant also objected to the in-court identification made by an Immigration Inspector who had viewed two photograp......
  • Taylor v. United States
    • United States
    • D.C. Court of Appeals
    • 6 Octubre 1982
    ...Those are significant factors in assessing their opportunity to observe the suspect. Manson v. Brathwaite, supra; United States v. Kilgore, 418 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1969). Detective Schwartz saw the suspect's face several additional times during the subsequent pursuit to a nearby well lighted......
  • 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