U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1968

United States v. Othell Campbell

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided May 20, 1968 · Haynsworth, Craven, Mac-Kenzie

395 F.2d 848; 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6862 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Thomas W. Greene, Greenville, S. C. (Sol E. Abrams, and Abrams, Bowen & Townes, Greenville, S. C., on brief) for appellant., William B. Long, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty. (Klyde Robinson, U. S. Atty., and Robert O. DuPre, Asst. U. S. Atty., on brief) for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

13 later published cases cite this decision.

United States v. Gustavo Diaz-Segovia (District Court, D. Maryland 1978)
State v. Wert (Tenn. Crim. App. 1977)
Commonwealth v. Robbins (Pa. Super. Ct. 1970)
United States v. Watt (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 1970)
Mendes v. Wendling (District Court, W.D. Virginia 2022)
United States v. Hatfield (10th Cir. 2003)
State v. Grawien (Wis. Ct. App. 1985)
Commonwealth v. Treftz (Pa. 1976)
United States v. French (United States District Court, Oklahoma Western 1976)
United States v. Claude Bishop Minton (4th Cir. 1973)
United States v. Errol B. Resnick (5th Cir. 1972)
People v. Ortega (Colo. 1971)
State v. Russo (Mo. Ct. App. 1971)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Convicted of possession of illicit whiskey, Othell Campbell has appealed, complaining that his motion to suppress evidence gained from an unlawful search and seizure should have been granted. The search in question was the viewing by Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division agents from an adjacent cornfield of a transaction in illicit whiskey which took place in the backyard of Campbell’s home. The agents were not within the curtilage and the “open field” doctrine is applicable to their observations. Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57, 44 S.Ct. 445, 68 L.Ed. 898; United States v. Shue, 4 Cir., 385 F.2d 416; McDowell v. United States, 8 Cir., 383 F.2d 599; Rosencranz v. United States, 1 Cir., 356 F.2d 310; United States v. Hassell, 6 Cir., 336 F.2d 684; United States v. Young, 4 Cir., 322 F.2d 443; United States v. Potts, 6 Cir., 297 F.2d 68; *849 Hodges v. United States, 5 Cir., 243 F.2d 281; Care v. United States, 10 Cir., 231 F.2d 22; Janney v. United States, 4 Cir., 206 F.2d 601. Nothing said in Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 88 S.Ct. 507, 19 L.Ed.2d 576, requires a different result.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.