U.S. v. Pariseau, No. 10-30237 (7-16-12) (Goodwin with W. Fletcher and M. Smith).

Defendant got off the plane in Seattle, headed from Alaska to Arizona, and was detained.  "We can get a warrant," the police said, to which the defendant replied, to the effect, "You may as well search me now." The search revealed meth strapped to his leg by an ace bandage. The 9th concluded that the "search me now," qualifies as consent.  The defendant also argued that venue lay in Seattle, where he was arrested, rather than Alaska.  The 9th holds that attempted possession with intent to distribute is a continuing offense, and venue is proper where the offense began, continued, and concluded.  The defendant began the attempt in Alaska, and had made several trips to Arizona from Alaska to further the plan.  Thus, venue was proper n Alaska.

U.S. v. Pope, No. 11-10311 (7-17-12) (Bea with Wallace and Callahan).

If at first you don't succeed in getting the defendant to empty his pockets, simply try again. That was the tactic of the police in the El Dorado National Forest upon encountering a party and the defendant. The defendant, according to the officer, looked like he was under the influence of pot (there was loud music after all), and so the officer asked him if he had been smoking. "Yes," admitted the defendant. The officer asked if the defendant had any on him. The defendant denied this. The officer then asked him to empty his pocket. The defendant refused. Then, the officer asked him again if he had marijuana on his person, and when the defendant admitted this, the officer ordered him to place the pot on the hood of the car. The 9th concluded that the first command was not a search, because nothing came of it. The second command, put the pot on the hood, was a search, but was incident to probable cause to arrest, and the evanescent nature of the evidence. The focus on "probable cause to arrest" rather than an actual arrest is troubling, but the 9th found it supported by the exigent circumstances.