Court Opinion

ID: 9460951
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 22:03:13.489603+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:36:50.358638
License: Public Domain

*1352WALLACE, Circuit Judge
(concurring and dissenting):
I concur in the result. I concur with that part of the majority opinion which holds Almeida-Sanchez is not retroactive as applied to searches conducted at fixed checkpoints. I dissent from that part of the majority opinion which applies a “functional equivalent” test to fixed checkpoints such as the one involved in this case. See United States v. Bowen, 500 F.2d 960, 979 (9th Cir. 1974) (en banc) (Wallace, J., dissenting). Further, from the limited record before us, I cannot make a factual finding that the San Onofre (San Clemente) checkpoint is not a functional equivalent of the border. I hasten to point out that the district judge made no such finding. However, one district court heard evidence on this precise issue and concluded this checkpoint was a functional equivalent of the border. United States v. Baca, 368 F.Supp. 398, 415 (S.D.Cal.1973). I believe our decision should be based upon a sufficient factual record such as that in Baca.
CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge, concurs in this concurring and dissenting opinion.