Legal Opinion

People v. BLARDONY

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 11, 1998No. A081271PublishedCited by 3 opinions

[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PARRILLI, J.

If a customs agent violates an administrative regulation by conducting a random search of mail from a foreign country, does the exclusionary rule require suppression of contraband found in the package? No; the United States Constitution does not prohibit random border searches of incoming international mail, nor is there any legislative provision for the exclusion of evidence recovered by customs agents in this manner. Therefore, such evidence is admissible in California courts.

After his motion to suppress evidence was denied, Mauro Miguel Blardony pleaded no contest to a…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. CaceresSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. United States v. RamseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. People v. LawlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  4. United States v. Ernesto J. Benevento, Ernest A. Benevento, Earl A. Keller, and Carmine LoiaconoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
  5. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ethelbert Chibuike ANI, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. Charles C.California Court of Appeal · 1999
  2. People v. ValenzuelaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  3. People v. ValenzuelaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API