State v. Mausert

Decision Date15 November 1915
PartiesSTATE v. MAUSERT.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error to Supreme Court.

George E. Mausert was convicted of keeping a disorderly house, his conviction was affirmed by the Supreme Court, and he brings error. Affirmed.

See, also, 85 N. J. Law, 498, 89 Atl. 1011.

Wilbur A. Heisley, of Newark, for plaintiff in error. Frederick F. Guild, of Newark, for the State.

BERGEN, J. The defendant was convicted by the judgment of the court of quarter sessions of the county of Essex of the crime of keeping a disorderly house, and on his appeal to the Supreme Court that judgment was affirmed, from which defendant appealed to this court.

Several reasons have been assigned for reversal of the judgment, one alone of which we deem it necessary to deal with, and that because of the earnestness with which it was pressed on the argument. As to all of the other assignments of error, we adopt the opinion of the Supreme Court and concur in the result. The alleged error, which we conceive is entitled to a fuller expression of opinion than that delivered for the Supreme Court, relates to the refusal of the trial court to direct the prosecutor of the pleas, representing the state, to return to the defendant, in accordance with the prayer of a petition presented by him for that purpose, a register of the guests at his hotel, containing an entry of their respective names, and the rooms assigned to each for occupation, and also a cashbook, showing receipts of payments made for such use. The petition recited that by virtue of an ordinary warrant for the arrest of the petitioner and others, an officer of the state forcibly entered the defendant's house, as "described in the indictment," and seized and took away defendant's hotel register and cashbook, which were then in the hands of the prosecutor of the pleas, and prayed that they be returned to him. The house "described in the indictment" was, "a certain common, ill-governed and disorderly house," and therefore the petition admitted that it was a house of that character. No testimony was taken in support of the petition, but the prosecutor of the pleas admitted that the officer who took the books did not have a search warrant, and that the only process he held was a warrant for the apprehension of the defendant and other persons named therein; that the defendant was the keeper of a hotel or public house, and was arrested in the office of his hotel; that the books seized were openly displayed on the counter of the hotel near where the defendant was arrested and within his control, although not actually on his person. From the admitted facts, the trial court found that the books were properly seized, being openly displayed in the public house where the crime was committed, and under the custody and control of the defendant at the time of his arrest, and thereupon denied the application. To this refusal an exception was taken and error assigned thereon. There was no proof of forcible entry, the place being an open room, to which the public resorted by defendant's permission. The case had been once tried, and this application was made within three days of the date set for the second trial, and the consideration of the petition was had by court and counsel upon the facts known by them without further proof. The gravamen of the offense charged was the keeping of a house to which, by defendant's procurement, men and women of evil name and fame resorted for unlawful purposes, one of them being the renting and occupation of rooms for the purpose of illicit Intercourse, and the books seized were important and admissible evidence, not only of the disorderly conduct of the inmates, but of defendant's knowledge of the purpose for which they frequented his house, and for which rooms were assigned to them.

The error claimed is that the taking of the books violated the constitutional prohibition contained in paragraph 6, art. 1, concerning "Rights and Privileges" in the Constitution of our state, which reads:

"(6) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • State v. Tonn
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • 16 Enero 1923
    ...the Supreme Court of the United States recognized this as a proper procedure. But not many state courts have followed this rule. In State v. Mausert, supra, the Court of Errors Appeals of New Jersey considered a case where a defendant was convicted of keeping a disorderly house. The defenda......
  • State v. Laundy
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • 28 Febrero 1922
    ......307; Gamble v. Keyes, 35 S.D. 644, 153 N.W. 888. Articles appearing in. open view, the discovery of which requires no search, may be. taken if of evidentiary value. State v. Quinn, 111. S.C. 174, 97 S.E. 62, 3 A.L.R. 1500; State v. Mausert, 88 N.J.Law, 286, 95 A. 991, L.R.A. 1916C, 1014;. Newman v. People, 23 Colo. 300, 47 P. 278. Indeed,. the arresting officer may in some circumstances search the. room or place where the accused is arrested. Smith v. Jerome, 47 Misc.Rep. 22, 93 N.Y.Supp. 202; People v. ......
  • State v. Myers
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • 4 Diciembre 1922
    ...State (Wyo.), 206 P. 373; People v. Cona, 180 Mich. 641, 147 N.W. 525; State v. District Court, 59 Mont. 600, 198 P. 362; State v. Mausert, 88 N.J.L. 286, 95 A. 991; note, R. A. 1916C, 1014-1017; State v. Hassan, 149 Iowa 518, 128 N.W. 960; May v. United States, 199 F. 53, 117 C. C. A. 431,......
  • State v. George
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 23 Diciembre 1924
    ...into his possession the instruments of the crime, and such property or evidence which he believes is connected with the offense; State v. Mausert, 95 A. 991; State Brown, 145 P. 69; People v. Cona, 147 N.W. 525; Yeoman v. Com., 224 S.W. 860; the arrest could have been made without a warrant......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT