Osborne v. State, 5032
| Decision Date | 05 October 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 5032,5032 |
| Citation | 418 P.2d 812,82 Nev. 342 |
| Parties | Roy Warren OSBORNE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Nevada, Respondent. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
Babcock & Sutton, Las Vegas, for appellant.
Harvey Dickerson, Atty. Gen., Carson City, Edward G. Marshall, Dist. Atty., and R. Ian Ross, Deputy Dist. Atty., Clark County, Las Vegas, for respondent.
Roy Warren Osborne was convicted of two counts of first degree murder following a consolidated trial. The jury in returning the verdict transposed the names in the two cases. On appeal, defendant asserts as error: (1) that the gun and other evidence used against him at the trial were the fruits of an illegal search of the automobile made without consent, waiver, or a search warrant, and (2) misstatement of the verdict.
A few minutes after midnight on the morning of March 28, 1964, defendant drove a two-toned 1957 Chevrolet with a bullet-shattered window into the parking structure of the Fremont Hotel, in Las Vegas, Nevada. He turned the car over to the parking attendant and on exiting from the front seat he kicked a blood-spattered towel onto the pavement. The attendat replaced the towel in the car and drove it to a stall whereupon he noted a pool of what appeared to be blood on the floor of the rear of the auto. A security guard (another employee of the hotel) was called. The security guard, after a cursory search of the vehicle, removed the registration slip from the steering post and placed it on the hood of the car. He then called the Las Vegas Police Department.
After the police arrived, a further search of the automobile yielded a revolver and ammunition in an open duffle bag under the front seat. When defendant finally returned to the parking lot he was arrested.
1. Investigation revealed that the car was registered to Norma Malloy Widick who was purported to be visiting Las Vegas with her mother. Both mother and daughter were the victims of the double murder for which Osborne was convicted. After denial of a motion to suppress, the items of evidence taken from the car were introduced into evidence over objection. The basis for the trial court's ruling was that the defendant lacked 'standing' to make the objection.
The ruling was correct. We held in Dean v. Fogliani, 81 Nev. 541, 407 P.2d 580 (1965), that, in order for a person to have the right to claim an unlawful invasion of privacy, he '(3) must be anyone who was legitimately on the premises when the search occurs and the fruits of the search are proposed to be used against him.' Supra, at 544, 407 P.2d at 582. (Emphasis supplied.) While the sanction of suppressing evidence was developed to protect the individual's right to privacy, Dean who was not on the premises when the search was made, had permission of the owner to be there when items sought were placed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harper v. State
...occasions this court has ruled on the matter of standing. Dean v. Fogliani, 81 Nev. 541, 407 P.2d 580 (1965), and Osborne v. State, 82 Nev. 342, 418 P.2d 812 (1966). Osborne involved the search of a stolen automobile. In that case, we held that since the accused did not own, nor have the ri......
-
Merica v. State
...v. United States, 362 U.S. 257, 80 S.Ct. 725, 4 L.Ed.2d 697 (1960); Dean v. Fogliani, 81 Nev. 541, 407 P.2d 580 (1965); Osborne v. State, 82 Nev. 342, 418 P.2d 812 (1966); Harper v. State, 84 Nev. 233, 440 P.2d 893 (1968); Gebert v. State, 85 Nev. 331, 454 P.2d 897 (1969); Simmons v. United......
-
State v. Nichols
...State v. Perkins, 543 S.W.2d 805, 808 (Mo.App.1976); State v. Bates, 540 S.W.2d 161, 165 (Mo.App.1976); Osborne v. State, 82 Nev. 342, 418 P.2d 812, 813 (1966); State v. Pokini, 45 Haw. 295, 367 P.2d 499, 509 (1961).8 Compare § 542.296 dealing with "Motion to suppress, grounds for." That st......
-
Warden, Nevada State Prison v. Peters
...is necessary since justice may be done by correction of the sentence, Lisby v. State, 82 Nev. 183, 414 P.2d 592 (1966); Osborne v. State, 82 Nev. 342, 418 P.2d 812 (1966); Dixon v. State, 83 Nev. ---, 424 P.2d 100 (1967), but if the judgment of conviction for grand larceny is void the sente......