United States of America, and v. Franklin Nial Castle, And
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Per curiam
The appellant, hereinafter called the defendant, was indicted, tried and convicted in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, of having violated Section 174 of Title 21, United States Code, by fraudulently and knowingly importing and bringing into the United States from Mexico three grams of heroin.
Before his trial, the defendant filed a Motion to suppress the heroin which, if not suppressed, was to be used by the prosecution at the trial as evidence to prove that the defendant had, in fact, imported heroin. The motion to suppress was based upon the claim that the heroin…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Barbara Jean Henderson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967
- Moises Rivas v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
- Paul Garcia Murgia, Pedro Hernandez Ramirez and Joe Ramirez Carpio v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- Landau v. United States Attorney for Southern District of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
3Cited by11 opinions
- United States v. Mary Ann HimmelwrightCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Jose Guadalupe-GarzaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
- United States v. Carol Asbury and John BruceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- United States v. Judi Ann HoltzCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1973
- United States v. Susan Jayne ShieldsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.