Com. v. Mayer

Decision Date04 June 1965
Citation349 Mass. 253,207 N.E.2d 686
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH v. Leo Paul MAYER.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Ronald J. Chisholm, Winchester, for defendant.

John T. Gaffney, Asst. Dist. Atty., for the Commonwealth.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, WHITTEMORE, CUTTER, and KIRK, JJ.

KIRK, Justice.

The defendant was found guilty at a trial without jury on three indictments charging him with unlawfully carrying a firearm and on one indictment charging him with armed robbery. The trial was subject to G.L. c. 278, §§ 33A-33G. The sole issue presented is whether there was error in denying the defendant's motion to suppress certain evidence which the defendant contends was obtained by the Commonwealth by an illegal search and seizure.

We summarize the evidence bearing on this issue. About 3 P.M. on June 9, 1964, Sergeant Matthew F. King, a Boston police officer with twenty-four years of experience, proceeded, in response to a radio call, to a hotel on Atlantic Avenue, Boston. He there learned from a maid, the housekeeper and the hotel manager that two guns and loose bullets were in a drawer in a room on the second floor of the hotel and that a man had registered alone for the room about 6 A.M. on June 9 under the name of Welch. He also learned that later on the same day the same man under a different name had registered for a room on the third floor of the hotel. In the officer's experience it was unusual for one person to be licensed to carry more than one gun. It therefore could be found, as the judge implicitly did find, that Sergeant King had probable cause to believe that the person who registered for and occupied the room on the second floor had committed a felony in violation of G.L. c. 269, § 10. The officer went to the third floor accompanied by others. As the defendant emerged from the room the maid said, 'That's him.' The defendant was immediately arrested by the officer and searched. On his person were some bills, a key to the room on the third floor, and, in his back pocket, a key to the room on the second floor.

At the time of his arrest the defendant said that he had 'found' the key to the second floor room. He denied that he had registered for that room. He denied that he was in that room. Thereafter Sergeant King, without a warrant, and accompanied by the manager, searched the second floor room and found in a chest of drawers two fully loaded revolvers, extra bullets, and a coat with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Com. v. Campbell
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • April 27, 1967
    ...Campbell had access to the car at will or any interest in it at times other than when he had it in possession. See Commonwealth v. Mayer, 349 Mass. 253, 207 N.E.2d 686. A fortiori, the defendant Nietsche, as only an occasional passenger in the car, also lacks standing to contest the legalit......
  • Com. v. Aguiar
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • June 14, 1976
    ...--- MASS. --- , 335 N.E.2D 903A (1975); Commonwealth v. Campbell, 352 Mass. 387, 401, 226 N.E.2d 211 (1967); Commonwealth v. Myer, 349 Mass. 253, 255, 207 N.E.2d 686 (1965), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 853, 87 S.Ct. 97, 17 L.Ed.2d 81 Mail coming into the United States is generally subject to sea......
  • Com. v. Brown
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • May 10, 1968
    ...to obey. The arrests of Donati and Zirpolo were lawful and the searchs incidental to the arrests were also lawful. Commonwealth v. Mayer, 349 Mass. 253, 255, 207 N.E.2d 686. 2. We consider the validity of the search warrant which resulted in the recovery of all of the stolen furs at 3:35 P.......
  • Com. v. Sandler
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • October 9, 1975
    ...circumstances it was sufficient that the officers obtained the permission of the owner, Drew. The judge cited Commonwealth v. Mayer, 349 Mass. 253, 207 N.E.2d 686 (1965), Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 241, 80 S.Ct. 683, 4 L.Ed.2d 668 (1960), and Friedman v. United States, 347 F.2d 69......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT