(concurring) .
Here we have “rough stuff” and I join in striking it down. Without indulging in explanation, I regard the *268result here as wholly consistent with our case of Blackford v. United States, 247 F.2d 745.
In as simple a case as this, I see no harm in not holding that a motion to suppress was necessary, but I do not believe the case should be taken as authority that a motion to suppress is never necessary.