State v. Mier
| Decision Date | 15 December 1948 |
| Citation | 35 N.W.2d 196,254 Wis. 180 |
| Parties | STATE v. MIER. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Milwaukee County; Robert C. Cannon, Civil Judge presiding.
Henry Arthur Mier was charged with the offense of printing lottery tickets. From an order suppressing certain evidence and from a judgment discharging the defendant, the state appeals. [By Editorial Staff.]
Order and judgment affirmed.
The order appealed from suppressed certain evidence obtained against the defendant pursuant to search warrant issued by Harvey L. Neelen, District Judge, and the judgment discharged the defendant. The State procured consent of the trial court to bring this appeal.Grove L. Broadfoot, Atty. Gen., and William J. McCauley, Dist. Atty., and Joseph E. Tierney, Deputy Dist. Atty., both of Milwaukee, for appellant.
Charles Swidler, of Milwaukee, for respondent.
The appeal presents this question: May a judge who is acting in place of the judge who issued a search warrant, because of an affidavit of prejudice, grant a motion to suppress the evidence obtained pursuant to the authorized search, without any affirmative proof of irregularity or insufficiency in the proceedings previous to the issuance of the search warrant?
Counsel for the State argues that the evidence produced by Officer Behrendt of the Milwaukee police force before District Judge Neelen was sufficient to establish an honest belief in the mind of said magistrate that the offense of printing lottery tickets was being committed by the defendant on the premises at 2320 South 13th Street in the city of Milwaukee.
After a description of the premises the officer stated his cause for asking for issuance of a search warrant in one answer:
It is contended by the State that this evidence was sufficient to justify issuance of the search warrant, that the officer knows as a police officer that football pools are placed in the hands of circulators on Tuesday of each week for use on the following weekend games.
In the first place, there was no showing that traffic in and out of the print shop on Tuesdays was greater than on other days of the week at the same hours, which, if true, might be a suspicious circumstance, or that the packages were all the same type, or that the unknown persons were the same persons on each Tuesday that the place was kept under surveillance. It is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Marshall, 77-066-CR
...This same rule was also followed in determining the sufficiency of a supporting affidavit for a search warrant. State v. Mier, 254 Wis. 180, 185, 35 N.W.2d 196 (1948). Within the last decade, however, a number of courts began to move away from a strict application of the "four-corners" test......
-
State v. Tarrell
...rights. 1 'It is not the law that a person convicted of a previous offense loses his constitutional guarantees.' State v. Mier, 254 Wis. 180, 184, 35 N.W.2d 196, 198 (1948). Concomitantly, this court has recognized that there are constitutional limitations on conditions of probation. 2 The ......
-
Morales v. State
...the legality of a search only upon the record established before the magistrate when he authorized issuance.' State v. Mier (1948), 254 Wis. 180, 185, 35 N.W.2d 196, 198. Although the brief of the defendant fails to indicate where in the record this testimony is located, it clearly was not ......