People v. Kramer
| Decision Date | 16 September 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 156.,156. |
| Citation | 244 N.W. 243,260 Mich. 94 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. KRAMER. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Ionia County; Royal A. Hawley, Judge.
Carl Kramer was convicted of having home-brew in his possession, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Louis T. Herman, of Grand Rapids, for appellant.
Paul W. Voorhies, of Lansing, and Frank C. Miller, of Ionia, for the people.
Carl Kramer was charged with having in his possession 510 quarts of home-brew beer, 25 gallons of home-brew mash in the making, and several dozen empty beer bottles, used for bottling beer, contrary to the provisions of section 9139, C. L. 1929. The offense was also charged as a fourth offense under sections 17338 to 17340, C. L. 1929. Respondent had been previously convicted and sentenced, twice for violations of the prohibition law and once for resisting an officer. The sole claim of error alleged is that the trial judge denied respondent the right to have the jury determine whether the affidavit on which the search warrant was issued was false in fact. Respondent claims that the beer, mash, and bottles were ‘planted’ in his home by the officers, and that it was for the jury to determine whether this claim is true or not. Respondent made a verbal motion to suppress the evidence. He did not comply with section 17288, C. L. 1929. The court denied the motion. This disposed of the question. At the trial he sought to prove that the affidavit upon which the search warrant was issued was false. This was equivalent to presenting his motion again and having the jury pass upon it. People v. Cech, 236 Mich. 75, 209 N. W. 944,People v. Burt, 236 Mich. 62, 210 N. W. 97. He is not entitled to a second hearing on the same matter, or to have the jury determine the admissibility of evidence. People v. Lenic, 255 Mich. 29, 237 N. W. 35;People v. Nutter, 255 Mich. 207, 237 N. W. 384.
The court properly denied respondent's second motion, and the judgment is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Blessing
...to a second hearing on the legality or illegality of search and seizure. People v. Kerwin, 234 Mich. 686 (209 N.W. 157); People v. Kramer, 260 Mich. 94 (244 N.W. 243). 'However, the trial court, in its discretion, permitted the issue to be renewed by defense counsels, and at their urging, h......
-
People v. Kaigler
...234 Mich. 686, 209 N.W. 157; People v. Willis, 243 Mich. 164, 219 N.W. 609; Prople v. Miller, 245 Mich. 115, 222 N.W. 151; People v. Kramer, 260 Mich. 94, 244 N.W. 243; People v. Zeigler, 358 Mich. 355, 100 N.W.2d 456; People v. Williams, Mich., 118 N.W.2d 391), it becomes necessary for us ......
-
People v. Ubbes
...accept for purposes of determining the admissibility of the arc welder. People v. Burke, 237 Mich. 127, 211 N.W. 44, and People v. Kramer, 260 Mich. 94, 244 N.W. 243. But cf. People v. Zeigler, 358 Mich. 355, 264-365, 100 N.W.2d 456, which, however, was decided prior to Jackson v. Denno, 37......
-
People v. Williams, 54
...in trial before the court without a jury.' To the same effect are People v. Kerwin, 234 Mich. 686, 209 N.W. 157, and People v. Kramer, 260 Mich. 94, 244 N.W. 243. The trial court did not err in denying motions to suppress Finally, defendants say the finding of guilt by the trial judge is co......