THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, November 7, 1995 TAG: 9511070289
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A2 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium: 56 lines
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to determine how difficult it should be for criminal defendants to win appeals aimed at barring evidence seized by police without a search warrant.
The justices agreed to hear an appeal in a Wisconsin case by two men who say cocaine seized from their car should not have been allowed as evidence against them.
Saul Ornelas and Ismael Ornelas-Ledesma were arrested at a Milwaukee motel on Dec. 11, 1992, after a sheriff's deputy spotted their car with a California license plate. A computer check showed it was registered to a known drug dealer.
Police said they got permission from the men, who'd emerged from the motel, to search the car. One officer said he noticed a loose door panel and removed it, finding a bag that contained cocaine.
Ornelas and Ornelas-Ledesma pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute about 4.4 pounds of cocaine but challenged a federal judge's ruling that the cocaine in the car could be evidence.
Ornelas was sentenced to five years and three months in prison; Ornelas-Ledesma got five years.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals set aside the convictions and ordered a federal judge to reconsider whether there was probable cause to remove the door panel. A federal magistrate recommended suppression of the drugs. A federal judge reinstated the convictions, saying the removal of the panel was supported by probable cause.
The 7th Circuit upheld the convictions, finding that the judge did not commit ``clear error.''
In the appeal granted Supreme Court review, lawyers for the two men said the appeals court should have conducted its own review instead of deferring to the judge's probable-cause determination. ILLUSTRATION: IN OTHER ACTIONS
The court agreed to use a New Jersey cocaine case to clarify the
authority of federal judges to lower the sentences of cooperative
defendants. A man sentenced for conspiring to distribute cocaine
says a judge wrongly thought 10 years was the most lenient sentence
possible.
The court will review a labor dispute stemming from Tyson Foods
Inc.'s 1989 acquisition of rival poultry producer Holly Farms. The
justices will decide whether chicken catchers and haulers are
``agricultural workers'' not covered by federal labor law.
Story, D2
KEYWORDS: SUPREME COURT by CNB