Gorland v. United States
| Decision Date | 19 June 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. 11275.,11275. |
| Citation | 91 US App. DC 90,197 F.2d 685 |
| Parties | GORLAND v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Bernard Margolius, Washington, D.C., for appellant.
Joseph M. Howard, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., with whom Charles M. Irelan, U. S. Atty. and Grace B. Stiles, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before CLARK, WILBUR K. MILLER and WASHINGTON, Circuit Judges.
Appellant was convicted and sentenced for gambling activities in violation of D.C. Code 1940, §§ 22-1501, 22-1502, and 22-1504.
He was arrested and certain evidence was seized by police officers in the course of executing a search warrant for the search of certain premises. The search warrant had been issued upon an affidavit which showed adequate probable cause to believe that gambling activities were being conducted on the premises named. Three months after the arrest, and well after indictment had been returned, appellant filed a motion to quash the search warrant, which was denied, and thereafter at trial his objection to the admission of evidence seized under the search warrant was overruled.1
There was adequate probable cause for issuance of the search warrant, and the subsequent search, seizure and arrest were legal, but even more, the motion to quash the search warrant did not meet the requirements of Rule 41(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. Appellant made no claim to ownership or possession of the property seized by police, or to an interest in the premises searched, and has no standing here to contest the seizure. See Harvey v. U. S. (Mann v. United States) D.C.Cir., 1952, 193 F.2d 928.
Affirmed.
1 Appellant's counsel on appeal was not counsel at trial.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Christensen v. United States
...938, 97 L.Ed. 1377, those claiming no interest in either the premises or the property have no standing, ibid., Gorland v. United States, 1952, 91 U.S.App.D.C. 90, 197 F.2d 685.4 But what logic is there in an inquiry into the ownership of either the premises or the property in a case where t......
-
Ramirez v. United States
...7th Cir., 1954, 214 F.2d 19, 24, certiorari denied 1955, 348 U.S. 909, 75 S.Ct. 294, 99 L.Ed. 713; Gorland v. United States, 1952, 91 U.S.App.D.C. 90, 197 F.2d 685, 686. We hold, then, that appellant has no standing to complain either of the validity of his wife's arrest or of the seizure o......
- Saunders v. United States, 11101.