IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-10252
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RONNIE BOURGEOIS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:99-CR-66-1-Y
--------------------
November 2, 2000
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ronnie Bourgeois was convicted of willfully and knowingly by
force taking money in custody and care of a bank official in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). Bourgeois argues that his
conviction should be reversed because the district court erred in
failing to suppress the fruits of an illegal search. Because the
district court did not enter findings of fact in denying the
motion to suppress, this court “must independently review the
record to determine whether any reasonable view of the evidence
supports admissibility." United States v. Yeagin, 927 F.2d 798,
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-10252
-2-
800 (5th Cir. 1991); United States v. Michelletti, 13 F.3d 838,
841 (5th Cir. 1994)(en banc).
Bourgeois’s argument that he would not have been linked with
the Fort Worth bank robbery without discovery of the white coin
bag is not persuasive. The evidence produced at the suppression
hearing shows that the white coin bag was discovered under a
search warrant based on evidence which was independent of the
questionable sweep. The sweep did not, even indirectly, result
in the seizure of the bag. In this case, the poisonous tree of
which Bourgeois complains bore no fruit. See United States v.
Miller, 146 F.3d 274, 279 (5th Cir. 1998). Under any reasonable
view of the evidence, Bourgeois has not shown that the district
court erred in admitting the evidence of the white coin bag and
its contents.
AFFIRMED.