Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> How Appealing

Litigation

: How Appealing

Who says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit doesn't hear interesting cases?

Who says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit doesn't hear interesting cases? Francisco Javier Rivera Agredano purchased a 1987 Nissan Pathfinder from the federal agency known as U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The agency had obtained the automobile via forfeiture after the Pathfinder's former owner attempted to transport marijuana across the Mexican border into the United States.

Unbeknownst to both Customs and Agredano, the Pathfinder contained additional marijuana in a hidden compartment that Customs failed to locate. Later, when Agredano and his brother-in-law were traveling in the vehicle in Mexico, they came upon a checkpoint operated by Mexican soldiers. The soldiers operating the checkpoint were a bit more thorough than U.S. Customs, and as a result both men were arrested and spent nearly a year in prison before being exonerated by a Mexican appellate court on January 10, 2003.

Today's appellate court ruling, by contrast, fails to deliver good news for Agredano, as the Federal Circuit has reversed a U.S. Court of Federal Claims decision in Agredano's favor. The trial court had ruled that Agredano's contract to purchase the vehicle contained an implied-in-fact warranty that the vehicle did not contain contraband and that Customs breached the warranty.

In coverage of the Court of Federal Claims' earlier ruling, the August 18, 2008 edition of The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that "Man who bought car full of pot wins case; U.S. purchase led to year in Mexican jail."

Full post as published by How Appealing on February 17, 2010 (boomark / email).