People v. Schregardus

• Decision Date: 05 March 1924
• Docket Number: No. 140.,140.
• Parties: PEOPLE v. SCHREGARDUS.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

226 Mich. 279

197 N.W. 573

PEOPLE

v.SCHREGARDUS.

No. 140.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

March 5, 1924.

Exceptions from Circuit Court, Ottawa County; Orien S. Cross, Judge.

Mitchell Schregardus was convicted of violating the prohibition law. On exceptions before sentence. Conviction affirmed.

Argued before CLARK, C. J., and McDONALD, BIRD, SHARPE, MOORE, STEERE, FELLOWS, and WIEST, JJ. Robinson & Parsons, of Holland, for appellant.

Fred T. Miles, of Holland, Pros. Atty., for the People.

WIEST, J.

Defendant stands convicted of the crime of manufacturing and having in his possession intoxicating liquor. The case is here on exceptions before sentence.

An officer, executing a search warrant, found 50 gallons of wine and 2 dozen bottles of ‘home brew beer’ in defendant's dwelling house. Before trial defendant moved the court to order the liquors returned, and suppress the same as evidence, because of alleged invalidity of the search warrant. Defendant claimed the showing made for the search warrant did not state facts from which probable cause could be found, and the command of the search warrant was to Ed. Vander West, without official designation. In the affidavit made by Mr. Vander West it was stated:

‘That intoxicating liquors are manufactured, possessed, sold, furnished, or given away, contrary to law, and are kept for the purpose of being sold, furnished, or given away contrary to law, in a two-shory frame building located on the following described parcel of land, viz.: At and known as No. 19 West Sixth street in the first floor and basement situate in the city of Holland, said county and state, and occupied by Mitchell Schregardus and Louis De Witt. That said building is a private dwelling house occupied as such, but is a place of public resort, and it is used for the unlawful sale and manufacture of intoxicating liquors. * * * That the facts supporting the belief of the affiant and upon which the foregoing allegations are made are as follows: I have been watching the place nights, covering a period of about 50 days, have often smelled liquor on the premises, saw people going out and in late at night, generally from the rear, and one night saw two men come from there late in an intoxicated condition; also I have had many reports from others concerning this place as a liquor joint.’

We will examine the showing for the search warrant, only so far as to determine whether it afforded justification for a finding of probable cause. Brewing of beer and fermentation of ingredients into wine send forth odors all their own. A sleuth, seeking evidence, may employ his sense of smell, and, if he sniffs liquor, follow his nose to the place the smell leads him.

Every hungry schoolboy can tell, by sense of smell, before reaching the kitchen door, the mainstay for dinner. The fragrance of ginger bread, pumpkin pies, and fried cakes, the aroma of coffee, jams, jellies, and preserves in the making, and the odors from cooking cabbage, onions and turnips go beyond kitchen doors; so do the odors of...