Jones v. State
| Decision Date | 28 November 1930 |
| Parties | JONES v. STATE. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Error to Criminal Court, Hamilton County; Charles W. Lusk, Judge.
Bill Jones was convicted of transporting a gallon or more of liquor, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Fletcher & Bernhardt, of Chattanooga, for plaintiff in error.
The Attorney General, for the State.
This is an appeal from a conviction for transporting a gallon or more of liquor. Plaintiff in error was arrested on the street in Chattanooga, and two containers of liquor were found concealed on his person. The quantity proved to be slightly more than a gallon. The evidence sustains the finding of guilt on the facts.
It is insisted that the arrest without a warrant was illegal, and the search which followed was therefore not justified rendering the testimony of the arresting officer inadmissible. The police officer was informed that a certain negro man would transport and deliver a gallon of red liquor to a certain place, 605 East Main street, that two colored men would be together, one walking in front of the other, and that the whisky would be concealed under the coat of one of the men. The officer repaired to the spot, and, when the suspected men passed and approached the destination fixed the informant of the officer, who was present, pointed out the man accused of committing this felony, whereupon the officer, who did not personally know the negro, but who had previously had some information regarding him, placed him under arrest and discovered the liquor concealed on his person. The officer subsequently had this liquor measured with the result above stated.
Counsel refer to Harlow v. State, 159 Tenn. 537, 20 S.W.2d 1045, as supporting the insistence that this arrest was illegal. This case is not in point. It was not a case of arresting upon information, followed by identification, such as we have here. The distinction must be recognized between the authority of a peace officer to arrest without a warrant for a felony on the one hand and a misdemeanor on the other. This distinction is pointed out in Dittberner v. State, 155 Tenn. 102, 291 S.W. 839, 840. And see Pesterfield et al. v. Vickers, 3 Cold. 205. Replying to a petition to rehear in Dittberner v. State, supra, this court quoted from the unreported case of Howard Martin v. State, and approved the following:
(3) When a felony has in fact been committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.
(4) On a charge made, upon a reasonable cause, of the commission of a felony by the person arrested.'
The substance of these provisions is that an officer may lawfully proceed to arrest without a warrant any person when the officer has, with reasonable cause, been led to believe that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a felony. It is essential to the protection of society that a wide discretion be vested in officers chosen to enforce our laws against felonies. It is impossible to define 'reasonable cause' in terms to fit all cases arising. Each case must stand on its own facts. A narrow...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Johnson
...and probable cause for the halting of the vehicle. Thompson v. State, 185 Tenn. 73, 74, 203 S.W.2d 361 (1947); Jones v. State, 161 Tenn. 370, 375, 33 S.W.2d 59, 61 (1930). The defendant's contention that Chief Deputy Johnson was acting without authority because he was outside his home count......
-
Howard v. State
...has cooperated with the police. W. LaFave, Search and Seizure § 5.1, pp. 392, 394 (1978). See also T.C.A. § 40-803; Jones v. State, 161 Tenn. 370, 33 S.W.2d 59, 60 (1930). Our courts have long recognized the need of officers to "act with promptness in enforcing the law." Thompson v. State, ......
-
Epps v. State
...fact might be inferred as in Thompson v. State, 185 Tenn. 73, 203 S.W.2d 361, there would be no question as to the search. Jones v. State, 161 Tenn. 370, 33 S.W.2d 59. We certain statutory provisions applicable to arrests by an officer in felonies and in misdemeanors. These are carried in t......
-
State v. York
...by the appellant, they had probable cause to arrest him. Simmons v. State, 198 Tenn. 587, 281 S.W.2d 487 (1955); Jones v. State, 161 Tenn. 370, 33 S.W.2d 59 (1930). The issue challenging the arrest is After the appellant was taken into custody, he was placed in a lineup and identified by th......