State v. Wolf, No. 13473
| Court | Court of Appeals of Idaho |
| Writing for the Court | BURNETT; WALTERS, C. J., and SWANSTROM |
| Citation | 640 P.2d 1190,102 Idaho 789 |
| Docket Number | No. 13473 |
| Decision Date | 09 February 1982 |
| Parties | The STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Fred WOLF, Defendant-Appellant. |
Page 1190
v.
Fred WOLF, Defendant-Appellant.
[102 Idaho 790]
Page 1191
David W. Cantrill of Cantrill & Skinner, Boise, for defendant-appellant.David H. Leroy, Atty. Gen., Lynn E. Thomas, Sol. Gen., Lance D. Churchill, Deputy Atty. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.
BURNETT, Judge.
The appellant challenges a judgment of conviction on the ground that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress certain evidence obtained under search warrants. He also contends that [102 Idaho 791]
Page 1192
evidence of a statement he made to a police officer after the search should have been excluded at trial. Finally, he attacks the sentence imposed as being unduly harsh. We affirm the judgment of conviction and the sentence.The record in this case discloses that on July 19, 1978, a female employee of the Ada County Sheriff's Office met with the appellant, ostensibly to seek employment with him as a prostitute. The meeting was recorded on tape. Statements made by the appellant during the meeting indicated that he was using his residence for a prostitution service and that evidence of prostitution, including a card file system, might be found there.
On August 2, 1978, a Boise City Police Department detective and an Ada County deputy prosecuting attorney sought a warrant from a magistrate to search appellant's residence. The detective gave sworn testimony during which he presented the tape recordings and transcripts of the July 19 meeting and of a prior telephone conversation in which the time and place of the meeting had been arranged. The detective also testified that another person, an unnamed police informant, had furnished him similar information about a prostitution service at defendant's residence and the existence of a card file there. He further testified that this informant had provided reliable information in the past.
The magistrate issued a warrant authorizing a search of appellant's residence for "a file card system containing the names of persons engaging in ... prostitution, and any other evidence or instrumentality of ... prostitution." Pursuant to this warrant, the detective and other officers searched appellant's residence and seized four boxes of index cards. The cards contained information about customers served, persons who provided the services, and payments received. The police later sought and obtained a second warrant authorizing them to search the residence for items observed during the first search but not specifically listed on the first warrant. A second search was then conducted and additional items were seized. The detective subsequently testified at trial that after the first search but before the second, the appellant, who was not being interrogated at the time, spoke to the detective and "made a statement ... that we should have found card files by now."
The appellant was charged with one count of inducing a woman for the purpose of prostitution, five counts of accepting the earnings of a prostitute, and one count of keeping a minor in a house of prostitution. The last charge was dismissed by the court after trial. A district court jury found appellant guilty on all other counts. The court entered judgment of conviction and sentenced the appellant to the custody of the state Board of Correction for an indeterminate period not exceeding three years on each count, to run concurrently.
Appellant's attack on the judgment of conviction focuses initially upon the search conducted pursuant to the first warrant. He asserts that the warrant was invalid for three reasons. We consider each reason separately.
The appellant first urges that the application for the warrant was inadequately supported by a showing of probable cause because the information attributed to the unnamed police informant failed to satisfy the standards prescribed by Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964). In Aguilar and in Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969), the United States Supreme Court held that a search warrant could be issued upon the hearsay statements of an unnamed informant only if there were a showing of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Kelly, No. 13796
...relevant to the charge of false pretenses. 427 U.S. at 480-81, 96 S.Ct. at 2748-49. We have previously applied Andresen in State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 (Ct.App.1982), and we believe Andresen is also controlling here. Where, as here, a residual phrase in a warrant, such as &qu......
-
State v. Fowler, No. 14388
...U.S. Const. amend. IV; Marron v. United States, 275 U.S. 192, 48 S.Ct. 74, 72 L.Ed. 231 (1927); Idaho Const. art. I, § 17; State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 (Ct.App.1982). The police, however, are not limited to seizing only those items specifically described in the warrant. Johns......
-
State v. Couch, No. 13724
...99 Idaho 855, 859, 590 P.2d 1001, 1005 (1978), quoting United States v. Miller, 529 F.2d 1125, 1128 (9th Cir. 1976); State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 First, the "undisclosed" phone conversation was between the undercover officer and appellant. The appellant presumably w......
-
State v. Martinez, No. 16602
...presenting a sufficient record to evaluate the merits of the challenge of a discretionary decision related to sentencing. State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 (Ct.App.1982). See also State v. Dusenbery, 109 Idaho 730, 710 P.2d 640 (Ct.App.1985). In the instant case no additional evid......
-
State v. Kelly, 13796
...relevant to the charge of false pretenses. 427 U.S. at 480-81, 96 S.Ct. at 2748-49. We have previously applied Andresen in State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 (Ct.App.1982), and we believe Andresen is also controlling here. Where, as here, a residual phrase in a warrant, such as "ot......
-
State v. Fowler, 14388
...U.S. Const. amend. IV; Marron v. United States, 275 U.S. 192, 48 S.Ct. 74, 72 L.Ed. 231 (1927); Idaho Const. art. I, § 17; State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 (Ct.App.1982). The police, however, are not limited to seizing only those items specifically described in the warrant. Johns......
-
State v. Couch, 13724
...99 Idaho 855, 859, 590 P.2d 1001, 1005 (1978), quoting United States v. Miller, 529 F.2d 1125, 1128 (9th Cir. 1976); State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 First, the "undisclosed" phone conversation was between the undercover officer and appellant. The appellant presumably was aware o......
-
State v. Martinez, 16602
...presenting a sufficient record to evaluate the merits of the challenge of a discretionary decision related to sentencing. State v. Wolf, 102 Idaho 789, 640 P.2d 1190 (Ct.App.1982). See also State v. Dusenbery, 109 Idaho 730, 710 P.2d 640 (Ct.App.1985). In the instant case no additional evid......