United States v. Nolan
Decision Date | 15 July 1969 |
Docket Number | No. 18580.,18580. |
Citation | 413 F.2d 850 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edson Lee NOLAN, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
John West, court appointed, Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellant.
Roger J. Makley, Asst. U. S. Atty., Dayton, Ohio, for appellee, Robert M. Draper, U. S. Atty., Charles R. Dersom, Asst. U. S. Atty., Columbus, Ohio, on the brief.
Before WEICK, Chief Judge, and EDWARDS and PECK, Circuit Judges.
Appellant appeals from his conviction after jury trial before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio for armed robbery of a bank, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) (1964).
The bank robbery occurred on the morning of February 21, 1967, in Frankfort, Ohio. That same evening the FBI asked appellant to appear for an interview concerning the robbery. Appellant did appear and was interrogated. He was also placed in a lineup but was not identified.
After this interrogation, appellant left Ohio and went to Arizona. In April of 1967 the FBI discovered where appellant was residing in Phoenix, Arizona. An FBI agent, Ernest C. Smith, filed two affidavits based upon investigation and surveillance in Phoenix and procured and executed two search warrants. One search warrant pertained to a car which appellant had purchased in Arizona, and the other to the room in which he was living. The search of the car produced specific items (including a money bag with the name of the bank printed on it) which were identified as fruits of the bank robbery and were introduced at appellant's trial.
Appellant now attacks the affidavit and the search of the car on the grounds that probable cause for that search was not established.
The disputed affidavit follows:
/s/ "ERNEST C. SMITH Spec. Agent, F.B.I."
The affidavit in relation to the search of the room appellant was occupying was also before the Commissioner at the time the search warrant for the car was issued. It provided:
/s/ "ERNEST C. SMITH Spec. Agent, F.B.I."
No attack is made upon the sufficiency of this affidavit to support the issuance of the search warrant for appellant's room.
We believe that the "probable cause" requirement of the Fourth Amendment was amply complied with in the two affidavits which were before the Commissioner. The Commissioner at the time of issuance of the search warrant for the car had before him facts "supported by oaths or affirmation" constituting "probable cause," "particularly describing the place to be searched" and the "things to be seized." U.S. CONST. amend. IV. Assuming that the hearsay evidence from Ray Gray, Jr., was essential to a finding of probable cause, there were "underlying circumstances" in Gray's personal observation of the rolls of coins in appellant's suitcase and in the FBI's confirmation of other information to support both the credibility of the hearsay and Gray's "reliability." See Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 114, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964); Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 416, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969).
The United States Supreme Court has never squarely decided whether or...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
DiPiazza v. United States, 18593
...affidavits. The additional statements enhance the showing of probable cause but are not necessary to establish it. In United States v. Nolan, 413 F.2d 850 (6th Cir.), this Court "We believe that consistent with the Fourth Amendment the facts supplied the Commissioner by both affidavits coul......
-
U.S. v. Hill
...States v. Soriano, 482 F.2d 469 (5th Cir. 1973); modified on other grounds, 497 F.2d 147 (5th Cir. 1974) (en banc); United States v. Nolan, 413 F.2d 850 (6th Cir. 1969). The Fourth Amendment's commands, like all constitutional requirements, are practical and not abstract. If the teachings o......
-
U.S. v. Dudek
...861, 863 (6th Cir. 1970). could be taken into account by him in determining probable cause as to each affidavit. United States v. Nolan, 413 F.2d 850, 853 (6th Cir. 1969). We have frequently in this circuit cited the commonsense interpretation of the Fourth Amendment set forth in United Sta......
-
United States v. Zarate
...by the other can be considered as support for the . . . finding of probable cause for the warrant under attack." United States v. Nolan, 413 F.2d 850, 853 (6th Cir. 1969) (holding that two affidavits could support probable cause for one warrant). However, a judge presented with multiple aff......