Strom v. United States, 6351.
| Decision Date | 01 June 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 6351.,6351. |
| Citation | 50 F.2d 547 |
| Parties | STROM v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
H. Sylvester Garvin, of Seattle, Wash., for appellant.
Anthony Savage, U. S. Atty., and Jeffrey Heiman, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Seattle, Wash.
Before WILBUR and SAWTELLE, Circuit Judges, and ST. SURE, District Judge.
Appellant was indicted upon three counts for violation of the National Prohibition Law (27 USCA). In pursuance of a stipulation, he was tried by the court sitting without a jury, and was found guilty. He appeals from the judgment of conviction solely upon the ground that the evidence against him had been unlawfully procured in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Federal Constitution and that his petition to suppress this evidence, addressed to the court, was improperly denied.
It appears from the evidence that at about 1 p. m. on September 23, 1930, the day the appellant was arrested, the prohibition officers were notified by an anonymous telephone message that a still was being operated in the premises known as 1827 Terry avenue, in Seattle, Wash. The deputy prohibition administrator, W. H. Kinnard, directed a federal prohibition agent, Leonard Regan, to visit the premises and make a report. This he did at about 5:30 p. m. He found two large frame buildings, No. 1827 and No. 1825 Terry avenue, with a plank walk between them. When standing on this walk he could smell the odor of mash coming from the upstairs of No. 1825, and he could detect the odor of distilled liquors. He reported to the deputy prohibition administrator that he believed a still was being operated in the attic of 1827 Terry avenue. At 6 p. m. Kinnard and Regan visited the premises. When they arrived, as they testified, they "detected a distillery by the smell of mash and whiskey emanating from 1827 Terry avenue." They secreted themselves in an abandoned automobile and watched the premises until about 10 p. m., when they saw the light go off in apartment No. 6 in which the still was believed to be located. Shortly after, two men came down the back stairs of 1827 Terry avenue, looked up and down the alley in the rear of the premises and all around, and then returned to the house. Five minutes later two men came out again; one, named Nelson, carrying a flashlight, and the defendant, Strom, who was in his stocking feet, carrying a pasteboard carton such as bootleggers usually use, which he put into the rear of a Chevrolet coupé standing four or five feet from the automobile in which the officers were secreted. When spoken to by the officers and told they were federal officers, defendant Strom ran away and was brought back by the officers. He was not placed under arrest until he was overtaken by the officers and brought back to the Chevrolet car. The officers then told him they wanted the balance of "the stuff." He gave them the key and showed them a shed in the rear of No. 1825 in which some whisky was stored. The officers then went upstairs on an outside stairway to an outside walk which extended across the rear of both buildings. From this walk, which they testified was open to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hashfield v. State
...164 U.S. 492, 499, 17 S.Ct. 154, 41 L.Ed. 528; Bird v. United States, 187 U.S. 118, 131, 23 S.Ct. 42, 47 L.Ed. 100; Strom v. United States, 9 Cir., 50 F.2d 547, 548. Cf. Lutch v. United States, 9 Cir., 73 F.2d 840, 841, and United States v. Heitner, 2 Cir., 149 F.2d 105, 107. It is plain th......
-
United States v. Heitner
...282 U.S. 694, 700, 701, 51 S.Ct. 240, 75 L. Ed. 629, 74 A.L.R. 1407; Wisniewski v. United States, 6 Cir., 47 F.2d 825; Strom v. United States, 9 Cir., 50 F.2d 547; Somer v. United States, 2 Cir., 138 F.2d 790 (semble); One Truck v. United States, 6 Cir., 140 F.2d 255. 2 Allen v. United Stat......
-
State v. Walker
...charged and the intent and purpose for which those acts were committed. Among such conduct is flight of the accused. Strom v. United States, 50 F.2d 547, 548 (9th Cir. 1931); Bird v. United States, 187 U.S. 118, 131, 23 S.Ct. 42, 47 L.Ed. 100 (1902); Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492, 49......
-
Rivers v. United States
...164 U.S. 492, 499, 17 S.Ct. 154, 41 L.Ed. 528; Bird v. United States, 187 U.S. 118, 131, 23 S.Ct. 42, 47 L.Ed. 100; Strom v. United States, 9 Cir., 50 F.2d 547, 548. Cf. Lutch v. United States, 9 Cir., 73 F.2d 840, 841, and United States v. Heitner, 2 Cir., 149 F.2d 105, 107. It is plain th......