Per Curiam. 362 U.S. McGANN v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 153. Argued March 3, 1960.-Decided March 21, 1960. Certiorari dismissed as improvidently granted. By appointment of the Court, 361 U. S. 803, Thomas Homer Davis argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner. Theodore George Gilinsky argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Wilkey and Beatrice Rosenberg. PER CURIAM. The writ of certiorari was improvidently granted and must be dismissed. When the case was brought here, on the meager documentation which so often is all that is presented by indigent prisoners seeking review on their own behalf, we assumed that a question involving the construction of 28 U. S. C. § 2255 called for adjudication. After argument, it became clear that the question of construction is not appropriately presented by the record because petitioner's claim upon the merits was fully considered and decided below, and we find his challenge of that action to be so insubstantial as not to have warranted bringing the case here. CITY OF COVINGTON, KENTUCKY, v. PUBLIC APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY. No. 628. Decided March 21, 1960. Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Charles S. Rhyne and S. White Rhyne, Jr. for appellant. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. SMITH ET AL. v. COLUMBIA COUNTY, APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OREGON. No. 645. Decided March 21, 1960. Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below: 216 Ore. 662, 341 P. 2d 540. Robert T. Mautz for appellants. Robert Y. Thornton, Attorney General of Oregon, and Carlisle B. Roberts and Theodore W. deLooze, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. 541680 O-60-18 Per Curiam. 362 U.S. WILLIS v. UNITED STATES. UNITED ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. No. 546, Misc. Decided March 21, 1960. Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Rankin for the United States. PER CURIAM. The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Upon the suggestion of the Solicitor General that the case be remanded to the Court of Appeals in light of what we are informed is the present practice of that court "to appoint an attorney in all cases on direct appeal where the trial judge's certificate of bad faith is attacked" the petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings. Syllabus. ABEL, ALIAS MARK, ALIAS COLLINS, ALIAS GOLDFUS, v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 2. Argued February 24-25, 1959.-Restored to the calendar for reargument March 23, 1959.-Reargued November 9, 1959.Decided March 28, 1960. Immigration and Naturalization Service officers arrested petitioner on an administrative warrant for deportation, searched the hotel room where he was arrested, his person and his luggage, and seized certain articles. After petitioner had checked out of his hotel room, an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation made a further search of the room, without a warrant but with the consent of the hotel management, and seized certain articles which petitioner had left there. The articles so seized were admitted in evidence over petitioner's objection at his trial for conspiracy to commit espionage, and he was convicted. Held: These searches and seizures did not violate the Fourth or Fifth Amendment, and the use in evidence of the articles so seized did not invalidate petitioner's conviction. Pp. 218-241. 1. On the record in this case, the Government did not use the administrative warrant of the Immigration and Naturalization Service as an improper instrument of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in obtaining evidence for a criminal prosecution. Pp. 225-230. 2. Petitioner's claim that the administrative warrant under which he was first arrested was invalid under the Fourth Amendment is not properly before this Court, since it was not made below and was expressly disavowed there. Pp. 230-234. 3. The articles seized by the immigration officers during the searches here involved were properly admitted in evidence. Pp. 234-240. 4. Immigration officers who effect an arrest for deportation on an administrative warrant have a right of incidental search analogous to the search permitted criminal law-enforcement officers incidental to a lawful arrest. Pp. 235-237. 5. The search of the hotel room by an F. B. I. agent without a warrant but with the consent of the hotel management, after peti Opinion of the Court. 362 U.S. tioner had relinquished the room, and the seizure of articles which petitioner had abandoned there were lawful, and such articles were properly admitted in evidence. Pp. 240-241. 258 F. 2d 485, affirmed. James B. Donovan argued and reargued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Thomas M. Debevoise II. Solicitor General Rankin argued and reargued the cause for the United States. With him on the original brief were Acting Assistant Attorney General Yeagley, William F. Tompkins and Kevin T. Maroney. With him on the supplemental brief on reargument were Assistant Attorney General Yeagley, John F. Davis, William F. Tompkins and Kevin T. Maroney. MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court. The question in this case is whether seven items were properly admitted into evidence at the petitioner's trial for conspiracy to commit espionage. All seven items were seized by officers of the Government without a search warrant. The seizures did not occur in connection with the exertion of the criminal process against petitioner. They arose out of his administrative arrest by the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service as a preliminary to his deportation. A motion to suppress these items as evidence, duly made in the District Court, was denied after a full hearing. 155 F. Supp. 8. Petitioner was tried, convicted and sentenced to thirty years' imprisonment and to the payment of a fine of $3,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed, 258 F. 2d 485. We granted certiorari, 358 U. S. 813, limiting the grant to the following two questions: "1. Whether the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States are violated by |