Commonwealth v. Hunsinger

Decision Date10 December 1926
Docket Number173-1926
Citation89 Pa.Super. 238
PartiesCommonwealth v. Hunsinger, Appellant
CourtPennsylvania Superior Court

Argued November 16, 1926

Appeal by defendant from judgment of Q. S. Bradford County, February Sessions, 1926, No. 49, in the case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. S. L. Hunsinger.

Indictment for unlawful manufacture and possession of intoxicating liquors. Before Culver, P. J.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.

Verdict of guilty on which judgment of sentence was passed. Defendant appealed.

Errors assigned were in discharging rule to suppress evidence, other rulings on evidence, and the sentence of the court.

Affirmed.

J. Roy Lilley, and with him William P. Wilson, for appellant.

David J. Fanning, District Attorney, for appellee.

Before Porter, P. J., Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn, Gawthrop and Cunningham, JJ.

OPINION

PORTER J.

The defendant was convicted in the court below upon an indictment charging the unlawful manufacture and possession of intoxicating liquor for beverage purposes. The defendant having been arrested and given bail to answer the charge, presented a petition to the court below averring that certain property, consisting of 2 ten-gallon stills, one coil and 25 gallons of moonshine whiskey, which was in the hands of the officers of the Commonwealth, had been seized by the state police officers in his private dwelling under a search warrant which was illegal, for the reason that at the time of making the complaint for the search warrant, the officer who made the complaint and those associated with him were not acquainted with the defendant, did not know where his dwelling was, had made no observation of the same and had no knowledge of the character of the persons frequenting said premises; that all the information which these officers had was hearsay and came to them from persons with whom they were not acquainted and of whose credibility they had no knowledge; and that the making of the complaint for the search warrant, the issuing of the search warrant and its execution were in violation of the constitutional rights of the defendant. The petition prayed that the evidence obtained by the use of the alleged unlawful search warrant be suppressed; and that the officers making the said search be enjoined from making any use whatever of the information which they obtained by virtue of the unlawful search. The court granted a rule to show cause why the prayer of the petitioner should not be granted, to which rule the district attorney filed an answer stating that he did not know whether the officer who made the complaint had personal knowledge of the facts in the complaint stated, and averred that the allegation of defendant's petition was immaterial upon the inquiry as to whether the defendant was entitled to have the evidence suppressed. The court after a hearing discharged the rule, which action is the subject of the first assignment of error. Upon the trial the Commonwealth offered to prove that the property, consisting of the stills and the whiskey, was found in the possession of the defendant in his dwelling; an objection by the defendant to this offer upon the ground that the search and seizure was under an illegal warrant was overruled and the evidence admitted, which ruling is the foundation of the second assignment of error.

The officer who made the sworn complaint upon which the search warrant issued had in the complaint stated: " that there is probable cause to believe, and that he has just and reasonable grounds for believing, and does believe etc.," but the affiant did not rest with the mere statement above referred to, but set forth: " That he has been informed by credible persons that they have bought from the defendant intoxicating liquor at the place above described and from his own observation he is satisfied that there is probable cause to believe that the premises are...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Commonwealth v. Bosurgi
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • April 16, 1963
    ... ... searches [411 Pa. 66] and, regrettably, in our discipline we ... have no ready litmus-paper test. The recurring questions of ... the reasonableness of searches must find resolution in the ... facts and circumstances of each case [citing a case].' ... See also: Commonwealth v. Hunsinger, 89 Pa.Super ... 238, 241, aff'd. 290 Pa. 185, 138 A. 683; ... Commonwealth v. Richards, supra, 198 Pa.Super. p ... 43, 182 A.2d p. 293 ... Under the ... instant circumstances, did the search of Bosurgi's person ... and the seizure from his person of the watches and glass ... ...
  • Hantz v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • May 8, 1929
    ... ... v. United States (1921), 255 U.S. 298, 65 L.Ed. 647, ... 41 S.Ct. 261; Youman v. Commonwealth ... (1920), 189 Ky. 152, 224 S.W. 860, 13 A. L. R. 1303 ...          The ... rule at common law was as above stated. It was adopted in ... State (1893), 104 ... Ala. 35, 16 So. 85, 53 Am. St. 17; State v ... Lock (1924), 302 Mo. 400, 259 S.W. 116; ... Commonwealth v. Hunsinger (1926), 89 ... Pa.Super. 238; Robertson v. State (1927), ... 94 Fla. 770, 114 So. 534; State v. Warfield ... (1924), 184 Wis. 56, 198 N.W. 854 ... ...
  • McSwain v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • August 1, 1929
    ... ... 42; People v. Brocamp ... (1923), 307 Ill. 448, 138 N.E. 728; People v ... Hayek (1928), 243 Mich. 546, 220 N.W. 790; ... Commonwealth v. Hunsinger (1927), 89 ... Pa.Super. 238; Ind., 290 Pa. 185, 138 A. 683; State ... v. Wansgaard (1928), 46 Idaho 20, [89 Ind.App. 600] ... 265 ... ...
  • Com. v. One 1958 Plymouth Sedan
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • April 21, 1964
    ...individual to such forfeited or contraband property.' See also: Commonwealth v. Davis, 163 Pa.Super. 224, 60 A.2d 552; Commonwealth v. Hunsinger, 89 Pa.Super. 238, 242; Commonwealth v. One Box Benedictine, etc., 89 Pa.Super. 467, aff'd. 290 Pa. 121, 138 A. The legislature has seen fit to de......
  • 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