United States v. Reginald T. Brown, 463 F.2d 949 (D.C. Cir. 1972). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Reginald T. Brown, 463 F.2d 949 (D.C. Cir. 1972). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“together ... raised a reasonable probability, if not a certainty, that appellant had contraband ...”
71 citation events (20 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Pedro Jolio Prandy-Binett (cadc, 1993-10-08)
Treatment trajectory · 1972 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1972 1999 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) United States v. Pedro Jolio Prandy-Binett (2×) also: Cited as authority (rule)
D.C. Cir. · 1993 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
together ... raised a reasonable probability, if not a certainty, that appellant had contraband ...
examined Cited as authority (rule) UNITED STATES v. DAVID D. LEWIS (8×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
D.C. · 2016 · confidence medium
Rawlings, 448 U.S. at 111 , 100 S.Ct. 2556 (citing, e.g., United States v. Brown, 150 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 114-15 , 463 F.2d 949, 950-51 (1972) (per curiam) (approving search incident to arrest where officer, who hád probable cause to believe defendant was in possession of narcotics, introduced himself and then searched defendant; no indication officer had seized defendant before search or intended to arrest defendant before search; “Even though a suspect has not formally been placed under arrest, a search of his person can be justified as incident to an arrest if an arrest is made immediately…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Millet v. United States (2×)
D.C. · 2009 · confidence medium
D.C. 113, 114, 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972). 3 Thus the fact that the police searched Millet before formally placing him under arrest did not require the court to suppress the fruits of the search if the officers had probable cause to *936 arrest him independent of the search itself.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Prince v. United States
D.C. · 2003 · confidence medium
D.C. 113, 114, 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972) (emphasis in original; citations omitted). 8 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hill v. United States
D.C. · 1993 · confidence medium
“Even though a suspect has not formally been placed under arrest, a search of his person can be justified as incident to an arrest if an arrest is made immediately after the search, and if, at the time of the search, there was probable cause to ar *979 rest.” United States v. Brown, 150 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 114 , 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972) (emphasis in original; citations omitted); accord, e.g., Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98 , 111 & n. 6, 100 S.Ct. 2556 , 2564 & n. 6, 65 L.Ed.2d 633 (1980); Irby v. United States, supra, 342 A.2d at 38 (citing Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S.App.
examined Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Pedro Jolio Prandy-Binett (4×)
D.C. Cir. · 1993 · confidence medium
We have credited officers' recognition of: "a package resembling narcotics," United States v. Thornton, 733 F.2d 121, 127 (D.C.Cir.1984); a distinctive "brown 'change-type' bag," United States v. Russell, 655 F.2d 1261, 1262-63 (D.C.Cir.1981), modified, 670 F.2d 323 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1108 , 102 S.Ct. 2909 , 73 L.Ed.2d 1317 (1982); a rectangular tinfoil packet, United States v. Thomas, 551 F.2d 347, 348 (D.C.Cir.1976) (per curiam); a "cream-colored envelope," United States v. Brown, 463 F.2d 949, 950-51 (D.C.Cir.1972); and an unsealed brown envelope, United States v. Wheeler, 4…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Minnick v. United States
D.C. · 1992 · confidence medium
"Even though a suspect has not formally been placed under arrest, a search of his person can be justified as incident to an arrest if an arrest is made immediately after the search, and if, at the time of the search, there was probable cause to arrest.” United States v. Brown, 150 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 114 , 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972) (citations omitted; emphasis in original), cited with approval in McWilliams v. United States, 298 A.2d 38, 39 (D.C.App.1972); see Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98, 111 , 100 S.Ct. 2556, 2564 , 65 L.Ed.2d 633 (1980) (“Where the formal arrest followed quickly on th…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) West v. United States
D.C. · 1992 · confidence medium
A search may be justified as incident to an arrest “if [the] arrest is made immediately after the search, and if, at the time of the search, there was probable cause to arrest.” United States v. Brown, 150 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 114 , 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972) (citations omitted and emphasis in original); McWilliams v. United States, 298 A.2d 38, 39 (D.C.1972).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Gary Barrett Green
D.C. Cir. · 1981 · confidence medium
See, e.g., United States v. White, 655 F.2d 1302, 1303 (D.C.Cir.1981) (per curiam) (automobile *1152 frequently visited by known drug addicts); United States v. Davis, 561 F.2d 1014, 1016-17 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 929 , 98 S.Ct. 416 , 54 L.Ed.2d 290 (1977) (repeated transactions and officer’s observation of pink tablets); United States v. Thomas, 551 F.2d 347, 347-48 (D.C.Cir.1976) (per curiam) (silver object identified as tinfoil packet); United States v. Brown, 463 F.2d 949, 950-51 (D.C.Cir.1972) (per curiam) (highly unusual conduct and “glassy” eyes suggesting that appella…
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Charles L. White
D.C. Cir. · 1981 · confidence medium
United States v. Thomas, 551 F.2d 347, 348 (D.C.Cir.1976); United States v. Brown, 463 F.2d 949, 950 (D.C.Cir.1972); United States v. Davis, 458 F.2d 819 (D.C.Cir.1972).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Charles M. Russell (2×)
D.C. Cir. · 1981 · confidence medium
United States v. Brown, 463 F.2d 949, 951 (D.C.Cir.1972).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Pierce (2×)
Ill. App. Ct. · 1980 · confidence medium
See Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S. App. D.C. 354 , 389 F.2d 305 , 308 (1967); United States v. Brown, 150 U.S. App. D.C. 113 , 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rawlings v. Kentucky (2×)
SCOTUS · 1980 · confidence medium
C. 113, 114, 463 F. 2d 949, 950 (1972).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. John R. James, Jr.
D.C. Cir. · 1977 · confidence medium
Compare United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38, 42-43 , 96 S.Ct. 2406, 2409-2410 , 49 L.Ed.2d 300, 305 (1976); Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 298 , 87 S.Ct. 1642, 1645 , 18 L.Ed.2d 782, 787 (1967), with United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 236 , 94 S.Ct. 467, 477 , 38 L.Ed.2d 427, 441 (1973); United States v. Brown, 150 U.S. App.D.C. 113, 114, 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972); Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 354 , 357, 389 F.2d 305, 308 (1967).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Johnson v. United States
D.C. · 1977 · confidence medium
Here, as in United States v. Brown, supra, at 115, 463 F.2d at 951 , the combination of factors “raised a reasonable probability, if not a certainty, that appellant had contraband narcotics in his possession.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Fairh Riggs
2d Cir. · 1973 · confidence medium
See Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 354 , 389 F.2d 305, 308 (1967) (Wright, J.) (dictum); id. at 316 (Leventhal, J., concurring); Henderson v. United States, 405 F.2d 874, 875 (5 Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 906 , 89 S.Ct. 1747 , 23 L.Ed.2d 219 (1969); United States v. Skinner, 412 F.2d 98, 103 (8 Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 967 , 90 S.Ct. 448 , 24 L.Ed.2d 433 (1969); United States v. Thomas, 432 F.2d 120, 122 (9 Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 1022 , 91 S.Ct. 587 , 27 L.Ed.2d 634 (1971); United States v. Brown, 463 F.2d 949, 950 (D.C.
cited Cited as authority (rule) McWilliams v. United States
D.C. · 1972 · confidence medium
United States v. Brown, D.C.Cir., 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972); Peterkin v. United States, D.C.App., 281 A.2d 567 (1971), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 922 , 92 S.Ct. 1788 , 32 L.Ed.2d 122 (1972). 6 .
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Gwendolyn E. Johnson (2×)
D.C. Cir. · 1973 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cook v. United States, 272 A.2d 444, 446 (D.C.App.1971). 28 The record is deficient in these respects because the trial judge focused exclusively on whether the search preceded a formal arrest. 11 As the majority notes, the issue should have been whether probable cause to arrest preceded the search. 12 For this reason, I would reverse and remand with directions to hold a new suppression hearing. 1 While the record is silent concerning the trial judge's thoughts on this matter, at oral argument appellant asserted that the crime thought to be involved was presence in an illegal establishment…
cited Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Alvin B. Thomas
D.C. Cir. · 1976 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e. g., United States v. Brown, 150 U.S. App.D.C. 113, 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972); United States v. Davis, 147 U.S.App.D.C. 400 , 458 F.2d 819, 822 (1972). 3 .
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Reginald T. BROWN, Appellant
71-1755.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Apr 12, 1972.
463 F.2d 949
Mr. Dorsey Evans, Washington, D. C. (appointed by this court) was on the brief for appellant., Messrs. Harold H. Titus, Jr., U. S. Atty., and John A. Terry, Roger E. Zuckerman, and Miss Ruth R. Banks, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief for appellee.
McGowan, Leventhal, MacKinnon.
Cited by 39 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

The sole issue in this appeal from a narcotics conviction (26 U.S.C. 4704(a) ) is the propriety of the District Court’s denial of appellant’s motion to suppress heroin capsules found in his possession.

On June 9, 1970, Metropolitan Police Officer Elijah Wade, on patrol in an area in which he had frequently observed what appeared to be narcotics transactions, saw appellant and another man alternately occupying a telephone booth without using the telephone. His suspicions aroused, Officer Wade approached the two men and identified himself. He noticed that appellant’s eyes were glassy, and concluded, on the basis of his experience with addicts, that appellant was “high” on narcotics. The officer also noticed, protruding from appellant’s shirt pocket, a cream-colored envelope of the type in which he had found narcotics on previous occasions. [1] He seized the envelope, which the court ruled to have been in plain view, and examined its contents. Finding that it held 145 capsules containing a white powder, Officer Wade formally notified appellant that he was under arrest.

Even though a suspect has not formally been placed under arrest, a search of his person can be justified as incident to an arrest if an arrest is made immediately after the search, and if, at the time of the search, there was probable cause to arrest. Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 354, 389 F.2d 305 (1967). See also United States v. Gorman, 355 F.2d 151 (2d Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 1024, 86 S. Ct. 1962, 16 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1966). We conclude that Officer Wade had probable cause to arrest appellant at the time he removed the envelope from the latter’s pocket.

A combination of four factors was sufficient to lead Officer Wade reasonably to believe that a narcotics offense was being committed by appellant. First, the place was “an area in which the police know that narcotics offenses frequently occur.” United States v. Davis, 147 U.S.App.D.C. 400, 458 F.2d 819 (March 16, 1972). Officer Wade testified that he had observed numerous suspected narcotics transactions there, and in fact had seen known addicts[*951] abandon a number of capsules at the same corner on the previous night. Second, appellant’s eyes were glassy, indicating to a person with the officer’s experience that he was an addict who had possessed narcotics in the recent past. Third, appellant’s conduct with respect to the telephone booth was unusual, and raised the possibility that he was using the booth to traffic in narcotics or to shield himself while injecting narcotics. Fourth, and most important, the envelope protruding from appellant’s shirt pocket was of the exact type in which Officer Wade had previously found narcotics.

Standing alone, any one of these four factors would likely be insufficient to justify an arrest. Together, however, they raised a reasonable probability, if not a certainty, that appellant had contraband narcotics in his possession. Probable cause requires no more. See Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 91, 85 S.Ct. 223, 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964).

Affirmed.

1

. On the previous night Officer Wade had approached a group of known addicts on the same corner, and, when they fled, recovered a similar cream-colored envelope containing over twenty-five capsules.