Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/964/1075/341579/
Timestamp: 2019-10-20 03:39:59
Document Index: 329967430

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 963', '§ 952', '§ 2', '§ 846', '§ 841', '§ 2', '§ 881']

United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Charles Matthew Savard, Scott Robert Friedman, Defendants-appellants, 964 F.2d 1075 (11th Cir. 1992) :: Justia
Justia › US Law › Case Law › Federal Courts › Courts of Appeals › Eleventh Circuit › 1992 › United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Charles Matthew Savard, Scott Robert Friedman, Defe...
United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Charles Matthew Savard, Scott Robert Friedman, Defendants-appellants, 964 F.2d 1075 (11th Cir. 1992)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit - 964 F.2d 1075 (11th Cir. 1992) June 15, 1992
On July 19, 1989, Friedman, Savard, and DeTamble were indicted by a Federal Grand Jury in the Middle District of Florida. The four count indictment charged conspiracy to import 100 kilograms or more of marijuana into the United States in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 963 (1988), count one; importation of 100 kilograms or more of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952 (1988) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (1988), count two; conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1988), count three; and possession with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) (1988) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, count four.4
The search constituted a border search, for which the agents needed no probable cause or even a suspicion to believe that criminal activity was afoot. See United States v. Ramsey, 431 U.S. 606, 616, 97 S. Ct. 1972, 1978, 52 L. Ed. 2d 617 (1977); United States v. Himmelwright, 551 F.2d 991, 993-94 (5th Cir. 1977)
After Friedman's arrest, his Ford Bronco vehicle, which was parked near the Fantasea, was seized pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a) (4) (1988) as a vehicle that had been used to facilitate a narcotics transaction. After its seizure, the vehicle was subjected to an inventory search. Friedman challenges the validity of this search, see infra note 5, but as we indicate in the text, his challenge is meritless