# United States v. Virginia Consuelo-Gonzalez

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · April 15, 1975 · 521 F.2d 259

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9462038

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Virginia CONSUELO-GONZALEZ, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** April 15, 1975
- **Citations:** 521 F.2d 259; 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 15148
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Choy
- **Judges:** Chambers, Merrill, Koelsch, Browning, Duniway, Ely, Hufstedler, Wright, Trask, Choy, Goodwin, Wallace, Sneed
- **Cited by:** 195 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9462038

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- observing that “probationers, like parolees and prisoners, properly are subject to limitations from which ordinary persons are free” and that “[mjerely because a convicted individual’s fundamental rights are involved should not * make a probation condition ... automatically su…
- holding that a “probationer, like the parolee, has the right to enjoy a significant degree of privacy,” which is infringed when a parole search is “intimidating and harassing”
- rejecting an argument that the “contract theory” of parole could be applied to probationers so as to make “[s]ubmission to [to any search] the price of probation”

## Opinion text

CHOY, Circuit Judge:
I concur in the majority opinion except as to the statement at page 266 reiterating the approbation given in the majority opinion in Latta v. Fitzharris to mere hunch as a basis of reasonable belief for a warrantless search by a parole/probation officer of a parolee’s/probationer’s residence.
For the reasons stated in my concurring opinion in Latta, I think the statement is ill-advised.
Circuit Judge MERRILL concurs in this concurring opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9462038. Public record. Not legal advice.