Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

United States v. Webster

426 F.2d 289

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1970-05-18
Topic
general

PER CURIAM: The only question worthy of consideration is whether the search and seizure violated the fourth amendment, so that the evidence obtained should have been suppressed. The questioned search occurred prior to the effective date of Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 89 S.Ct. 2034, 23 L.Ed.2d 685 (1969). We have previously held Chi mel not to be retroactive in application. Porter v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Webster. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
6 opinions
UNITED STATES v. WEBSTER,426 F.2d 289(4th Cir. 1970)
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Walter Rodger WEBSTER, Charles
Frazier, Appellants.
Nos. 14322, 14324, 14398.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Argued May 7, 1970.
Decided May 18, 1970.
Harold I. Glaser, Baltimore, Md. (Harvey A. Blum, Baltimore, Md., on the brief), for appellants.

J. Frederick Motz, Asst. U.S. Atty. (Stephen H. Sachs, U.S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee.Page 290
Before SOBELOFF and CRAVEN, Circuit Judges, and JONES, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
The only question worthy of consideration is whether the search and seizure violated the fourth amendment, so that the evidence obtained should have been suppressed. The questioned search occurred prior to the effective date of Chimel v. California,395 U.S. 752,89 S.Ct. 2034,23 L.Ed.2d 685(1969). We have previously heldChimelnot to be retroactive in application. Porter v. Ashmore,421 F.2d 1186(4th Cir. 1970). Whether the search was reasonable is thus to be determined by application of the standards of United States v. Rabinowitz,339 U.S. 56,70 S.Ct. 430,94 L.Ed. 653(1950). Applying that standard we find no error.

Affirmed.Page 299