State v. Benoski
| Decision Date | 09 September 1971 |
| Citation | 281 A.2d 128 |
| Parties | STATE of Maine v. Fred E. BENOSKI et al. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Ronald Ayotte, County Atty., Biddeford, for plaintiff.
Patrick L. J. Veilleux, Kittery, Harry S. Littlefield, Wells Beach, James H. Dineen, Kittery, Waterhouse, Carroll & Cyr, By Harold D. Carroll, Robert N. Cyr, Biddeford, George S. Hutchins, Jr., York, for defendants.
Before DUFRESNE, C. J., and WEBBER, WEATHERBEE, POMEROY, WERNICK and ARCHIBALD, JJ.
An interlocutory ruling denying a motion to suppress evidence in this criminal proceeding has been reported for review pursuant to M.R.Crim.P., Rule 37A(b). Defendants have been indicted and await trial upon a charge of possession of stolen property, namely 'one Realistic transreceiver, model 18 and one Kennedy tool box, full of machinist's tools.' 1
On December 19, 1969 Officer Moulton made application to a complaint justice for a search warrant. The application was accompanied by two 'affidavits,' both of which the officer says he prepared and signed on December 19 and to both of which he says he made oath before the complaint justice before the warrant issued. As will be seen, the first document captioned 'Affidavit' bears no jurat whereas the second document captioned 'Affidavit and Request for Search Warrant' bears a jurat indicating that Officer Moulton made oath to the same. Although the Justice below made no findings in support of his order of dismissal on the motion to suppress, we must assume that all disputed issues of fact were resolved favorably to the State's position. The Court could have found on the basis of the Moulton testimony and reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom that the officer took oath to both 'affidavits' simultaneously and that in attaching the jurat to but one of the sheets, the complaint justice treated the two documents as but parts of a single affidavit, intending the single jurat to apply to both. That being so, we may properly determine the validity of the search warrant, treating the two part 'affidavit' as a single supporting document.
The affidavit, warrant and return were in the following form:
'December 19, 1969
6981
AFFIDAVIT
ALBERT E. MOULTON, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
That he is a Police Officer in York, York County, Maine. I, on December 17, 1969 in Dover N. H. met with Inspector James Rowe of the Dover Police Department and a confidental informant, whom has proven reliable to him.
1. 12-18-69 1700 hours informant advised Rowe that a 17 year old male subject had a quanity of marijuana in his right hand jacket pocket under his glove. Rowe arrested subject and found material as and where described.
2. 12-18-69 A.M. Informant advised Rowe smoking material small brass pipe to be on or near window ledge by a flat roof suspects apartment. Search made material found with residue of hashish as in location and as described.
Said informant stated that on the weekend of December 6, 1969 to the best of his recollection did then and there see in a house duly described and checked by this Officer to be 23 Halstead Street, Kittery, Maine rented by Ronald L. Clark, and occupied by him and others. Present at this time of observation, Robert Cullen, Fred Benoski, Robert H. King, Ronald L. Clark, party known only as Popie (spelling?) and two (2) unidentified females, approximately 18 years of age.
Did see a Magnavox Stereo set, approximately 5 feet in length, being carried in. Set up in Living Room a good size marble table, and on the floor 6 or 7 T.V. sets, one a white protable; was offered a T.V. for $30.00 or less. Conversation during time informant present indicated the Magnavox Stero, marble table, CB Realistic receivers, would be kept in the apartment.
The above named were talking about 74 breaks in the general York area and that many would not be discovered until spring.
Subjects present were also breaking down a kilo of marijuana on the kitchen table into small bags.
Affiant prays a search warrant be issued for above stated residence; For possession of stolen property and narcotic drugs, marijuana, hallucigens that may be contained there in.
s/ Albert E. Moulton'
'STATE OF MAINE
YORK, SS.
DISTRICT COURT
District TEN
Division of
SOUTHERN YORK
6981
To Duncan A. McEachern, Complaint Justice, of the District Court to be holden at Kittery in the County of York, and State of Maine.
Albert E. Moulton a York Police Officer of York, in the County of York in said State of Maine, on oath complains that he has probable cause to believe and does believe that on the premises known as premises owned by William C. Hushing, Richard B. Redmayne, d/b/a Coastal Associates located at 23 Halstead Street, in the Town of Kittery County of York in said State, said premises being occupied by Ronald L. Clark
There is now being concealed certain property, to wit;
One, Magnavox Stero, model #3ST 662-A, FRWB Ser. #1743316
one large marble top coffee table with wrought iron frame weight about 150 lbs.
2: Realistic C.B. Transcerivers, one model 18, one model 128
that said property (state reason for seizure) Is stolen property, an is being illegally kept at said premises.
WHEREFORE, the said Albert E. Moulton prays that a warrant may issue authorizing a search in the daytime of the above described premises, for said property; and that if said property, or any part of the same be there found, the said Ronald L. Clark, or the person having said property in his custody or possession, may be arrested and held for examination as the law directs.
Dated at Kittery, Maine, this 19th day of December 1969.
s/ Albert E. Moulton
Subscribed and sworn to by the said Albert E. Moulton this 19th day of December 1969 before me
s/ Duncan A. McEachern
Complaint Justice'
'(Side 1)
STATE OF MAINE
YORK, ss.
DISTRICT COURT
District of 10th
Division of
Southern Maine
6981
To the Sheriff of York County, or any of his deputies or any other authorized officer:
Affidavit having been made before me by Albert E. Moulton that he has reason to believe that on the premises known as William C. Hushing, and Richard B. Redmayne DSA Coastal Assoc. (Alfred Reg. Deed, vol. 1833, p. 657, Town of Kittery, MAP-M16, lot 36 located at 23 Halstead Street, in the Town of Kittery County of York and State of Maine, said premises being occupied by Ronald L. Clark et al.
there is now being concealed certain property, to wit:
one, Magnavox Streo, model #3ST 662-A, FRWB Ser. #1743316,
one large marble top coffee table with wrought iron frame weight about 150 lbs.
2: Realistic C.B. Transceivers, one model 18, one model 128
As I am satisfied that there is probable cause to believe that the property so described and used is being concealed on the premises above described, upon the following grounds:
Upon affidavit of Chief Albert E. Moulton supplemented by his oral testimony. Said affidavit being sufficient.
You are hereby commanded to search the place named for the property specified, serving this warrant and making the search in the daytime and if the property be found there to seize it, prepare a written inventory of the property seized, and bring the property and the person in whose possession or custody the same was found before a District Judge.
Dated, this 19th day of December 1969.
s/ Duncan A. McEachern
Complaint Justice'
'(Side 2 of Search Warrant)
STATE OF MAINE
York, §§
By virtue of the within warrant, I have searched the premises named therein and there found
1. Realistic C.B. Transceiver model 15
1. Marble Coffee Table Top
1. Am FM Pansonic Small Table Clock Radio
1 set Compass and wheel cuff links & tie pin
1 set world globe cuff links.
9 coins in cuff link box
2 fishing poles w/reels
2 fishing poles w/o reels
1 pr. swank cuff links
1 set stainless steel sliverware in case Oneida LTD.
1 Kennedy Tool Box (Full machinist tools.
1 Corona Portable Typewriter
1 Sears solid state portable stereo.
and I now have the same together with the said Ronald L. Clark et al in whose possession or custody they were found before the Court for examination.
s/ Albert E. Moulton
STATE OF MAINE
COUNTY OF YORK
CLERK'S OFFICE Filed, Jan. 26 11:49 AM '70
William Wilson, Clerk /s/ GC'
We turn first to the search warrant itself. M.R.Crim.P., Rule 41(b) as amended October 4, 1967 states the following:
'(b) Grounds for Issuance. A warrant may be issued under this rule to search for and seize any property:
(1) Stone or embezzled; or
(2) Designed or intended for use or which is or has been used as a means of committing a criminal offense; or (3) The possession of which is unlawful; or
(4) Consisting of non-testimonial evidence which will aid in a particular apprehension or conviction.' (Emphasis supplied.)
It is obvious that it is essential that the magistrate find probable cause to believe that the property to be searched for falls in one of these categories, in this case the category of stolen property. Such a finding must in turn be adequately based upon the affidavit. M.R.Crim.P., Rule 41(c) provides in part:
(Emphasis supplied.)
The search warrant here made no reference to the property described as property stolen or probably stolen and no other ground was suggested for a search other than that the property was 'concealed' on the premises. The warrant was deficient as violative of the plain requirements of Rule 41(c) in this respect. 2
Moreover, a finding that there was probable cause to believe the items listed were stolen property, even if made, would have lacked...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Thibodeau
...from more than mere rumor or suspicion. Absent a recitation of such circumstances, the warrant was patently defective. State v. Benoski, 1971, Me., 281 A.2d 128; State v. Hawkins, 1970, Me., 261 A.2d 255.3 At the time of the offense, indictment, trial and sentencing, 17 M.R.S.A. § 3551 prov......
-
State v. Cowperthwaite
...contention that the propriety of a search incident to arrest is dependent upon the existence of a valid arrest (see e. g. State v. Benoski, 1971, Me., 281 A.2d 128, 133), that doctrine has no application to this case. The materials taken by the warden were not products of a search. The obje......
-
State v. Appleton
...the four corners of the affidavit to determine the existence of probable cause. State v. Hawkins, 1970, Me., 261 A.2d 255; State v. Benoski, 1971, Me., 281 A.2d 128; State v. Cadigan, 1969, Me., 249 A.2d 750. The warrant must stand or fall solely on the contents of the affidavit. 1 Evidence......
-
State v. Henry
...believe signer under oath at the time he signed his name to the proof of service, despite lack of documentation thereof); State v. Benoski, 281 A.2d 128, 129 (Me. 1971) (supporting document lacking jurat held Identified Informant State v. Utterback, 240 Neb. 981, 485 N.W.2d 760 (1992),3 urg......