Boyd v. State

Decision Date30 January 1933
Docket Number30248
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
PartiesBOYD v. STATE

Division B

1. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES.

Affidavit and search warrant must conform substantially to statutory requirements.

2. CRIMINAL LAW.

Affidavit and search warrant must be produced to authorize admission of evidence obtained by search where objection is made that search was without affidavit and search warrant.

3. CRIMINAL LAW.

Where affidavit and search warrant have been lost, proof must show not only loss but also substantially their contents.

4. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES.

That defendant neither objected nor consented to search for liquor did not constitute waiver of legal search warrant.

5. CRIMINAL LAW.

In prosecution for possessing whisky, evidence obtained by search allegedly under authority of lost affidavit and search warrant held improperly admitted over defendant's objection, in absence of showing that defendant did not object to search.

HON. E M. LANE, Judge.

APPEAL from circuit court of Smith county, HON. E. M. LANE, Judge.

Hobson Boyd was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquor, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

J. D. Martin, of Raleigh, for appellant.

The court below committed error in permitting evidence, over the objection of appellant, of affidavit and search warrant, when the state did not produce said affidavit and search warrant, and did not properly account for the loss of same.

The state failed to introduce any evidence sufficiently to show that said affidavit and search warrant were lost or destroyed so that they could not be had upon the trial of said cause in the court below.

Wells v. State, 135 Miss. 764, 100 So. 674.

S. V. Little, of Mize, for appellant.

This court has repeatedly held that before evidence is admissible under the law governing search and seizure, the state must show that the defendant, or appellant was served with a copy of said search warrant, and that if said affidavit and search warrant be lost, that it must show that it was issued and cannot be found, which the state has failed to do, in this instance.

Nelson v. State, No. 24344; Cutrer v. State, 138 So. 343.

Herbert Nunnery, Assistant Attorney-General, for the state.

To authorize admission of evidence obtained by a search of a person's premises, the affidavit and search warrant must be produced before the evidence is received, if objection is made thereto. If the affidavit and search warrant have been lost, not only must the proof show the loss, but should also show substantially the contents of the affidavit and warrant.

Pickle v. State, 118 So. 625.

The fact that the affidavit and search warrant had been lost was well established, and that a search had been made for affidavit and search warrant, but that they could not be found, according to the testimony of the witness Lack. The contents of the search warrant was generally or substantially established.

Cuevas v. City of Gulfport, 134 Miss. 634, 95 So. 503.

OPINION

Anderson, J.

Appellant was indicted and convicted in the circuit court of Smith county of the crime of possessing intoxicating liquor, and fined in the sum of five hundred dollars and sentenced to serve ninety days in jail. From that judgment he prosecutes this appeal.

Intoxicating liquor, twenty-one pints, was found near the home of appellant by the sheriff of Smith county and two of his deputies as the result of a search of appellant's premises. The evidence secured as the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Callen v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • April 28, 2017
    ...(where original document not intentionally lost or destroyed, prosecution entitled to offer secondary evidence); Boyd v. State, 164 Miss. 610, 613, 145 So. 618 (1933) (‘If the affidavit and search warrant have been lost, the proof must show not only the loss but also substantially their con......
  • C.B.D. v. State, CR-10-0640
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • October 4, 2011
    ...means ... then the defendant will not be deprived of any opportunity to mount a challenge against the warrant."); and Boyd v. State, 164 Miss. 610, 145 So. 618, 619 (1933) (when an affidavit and search warrant are lost, the State must only prove "substantially their contents"). Therefore, m......
  • C.B.D. v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • February 10, 2012
    ...means ... then the defendant will not be deprived of any opportunity to mount a challenge against the warrant.”); and Boyd v. State, 164 Miss. 610, 145 So. 618, 619 (1933) (when an affidavit and search warrant are lost, the State must only prove “substantially their contents”). Therefore, m......
  • State v. McMilliam
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 18, 1956
    ...140, 43 S.E.2d 528; Conley v. Commonwealth, 230 Ky. 391, 20 S.W.2d 75; Wilson v. Commonwealth, 228 Ky. 517, 15 S.W.2d 422; Boyd v. State, 164 Miss. 610, 145 So. 618; Pickle v. State, 151 Miss. 549, 118 So. 625; King v. State, 147 Miss. 31, 113 So. 173; Nelson v. STate, 137 Miss. 170, 102 So......
  • 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