United States ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, No. 17748.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtCASTLE, , MAJOR, Senior Circuit , and HASTINGS, Senior Circuit
Citation418 F.2d 430
Decision Date26 November 1969
Docket NumberNo. 17748.
PartiesUNITED STATES ex rel. Harley J. BEAL, Relator-Appellant, v. Michael SKAFF, Warden, Wisconsin State Reformatory, Respondent-Appellee.

418 F.2d 430 (1969)

UNITED STATES ex rel. Harley J. BEAL, Relator-Appellant,
v.
Michael SKAFF, Warden, Wisconsin State Reformatory, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 17748.

United States Court of Appeals Seventh Circuit.

November 26, 1969.


418 F.2d 431

E. J. Morse, Jr., R. R. Roggensack, Lancaster, Wis., Morse, Morse & Roggensack, Lancaster, Wis., for relator-appellant.

Robert W. Warren, Atty. Gen., of Wisconsin, Sverre O. Tinglum, Madison, Wis., William A. Platz, Asst. Atty. Gen., Madison, Wis., for respondent-appellee.

Before CASTLE, Chief Judge, MAJOR, Senior Circuit Judge, and HASTINGS, Senior Circuit Judge.

CASTLE, Chief Judge.

Petitioner, who is presently incarcerated in the Wisconsin State Reformatory, appeals from the denial by the district court of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On March 21, 1968, petitioner was convicted in the Grant County, Wisconsin, Circuit Court of illegal possession of marijuana in violation of Section 161.275(1), Wisconsin Statutes. The marijuana was seized in petitioner's home during a search conducted pursuant to a search warrant issued by a magistrate. The issue presented to the district court and on appeal concerns the validity of that warrant.

On October 23, 1967, a federal law enforcement officer informed the Grant County district attorney that a parcel, bearing the postmark of Lexington, Kentucky, having no return address, and addressed to petitioner at his residence in Platteville, Wisconsin, had been observed in the United States mail at Milwaukee, and that the contents, which were believed to be marijuana, were leaking out. The package, which had been sent by first class mail, was subsequently intercepted by local law enforcement officers in Platteville. The chief of police was permitted to examine and "dope" the outside of the parcel with a fluorescent chemical, but was not permitted to take any of the contents which had come out of the package.

Upon concluding his examination, the police chief informed the district attorney that he believed the parcel contained marijuana. The district attorney then swore to a complaint to permit a search of petitioner's residence for the parcel. The complaint is a printed form with certain portions to be completed by the affiant. As a part of the printed form there appear the words, "in and upon certain premises * * * there are now located and concealed certain things, to wit:". Immediately thereafter

418 F.2d 432
was typed a description of the parcel and its contents, the addressee and postmark, and the statute believed to have been violated. Following this section of the complaint appeared the facts which were advanced to support the issuance of the warrant
"Complainant is the District Attorney for Grant County, Wisconsin, duly elected, qualified and acting. On Monday, October 23rd complainant was informed that the parcel described above had been seen by a reliable informer while in the U. S. Mail in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and that said parcel had been damaged and the contents thereof were leaking out; that said informer is an employee of the U. S. of America, charged with duties of law enforcement and stated that he believes the contents of such package are marijuana; that said informer is acquainted with marijuana and knows its appearance in processed form; that said informer believed that the contents of such package was marijuana because of the odor, because of the presence of certain small seeds therein and because of the color and shredded form of the leaves; that Lexington, Kentucky is an area where marijuana grows wild in the U. S.; that complainant has made an investigation and is informed and believes that the premises located at 495 W. Mineral St., Platteville,
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
52 practice notes
  • State v. Wright, No. 17057
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Idaho
    • April 6, 1989
    ...been upheld in many jurisdictions. See, e.g., United States v. Outland, 476 F.2d 581 (6th Cir.1973); United States ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430 (7th Cir.1969); United States v. Feldman, 366 F.Supp. 356 (D.Hawaii 1973); Johnson v. State, 617 P.2d 1117 (Alaska 1983); Mehrens v. State, ......
  • Kostelec v. State, No. 2005
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • December 6, 1996
    ...States v. Lowe, 575 F.2d 1193 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 869, 99 S.Ct. 198, 58 L.Ed.2d 180 (1978); U.S. ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430 (7th Cir.1969); United States v. McGriff, 678 F.Supp. 1010 (E.D.N.Y.1988); State v. Stott, 243 Neb. 967, 503 N.W.2d 822 (1993); State v. Engel,......
  • State v. Womack, No. 971539-CA
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Utah
    • October 22, 1998
    ...97 F.3d 669, 670 (2d Cir.1996); United States v. Outland, 476 F.2d 581, 582 n. 1 (6th Cir.1973); United States ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430, 432 (7th Cir.1969), these police practices are not necessary to show probable cause. 4 We For example, without discussing the specific point Wo......
  • State v. Sachs, No. 20019
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 27, 1975
    ...executed until delivery had been accomplished. United States v. Odland, 502 F.2d 148 (7th Cir. 1974); United States ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430 (7th Cir. 1969); People v. Glen, 30 N.Y.2d 252, 331 N.Y.S.2d 656, 282 N.E.2d 614 (1972); United States v. Feldman, 366 F.Supp. 356 (1973); ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
52 cases
  • State v. Wright, No. 17057
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Idaho
    • April 6, 1989
    ...been upheld in many jurisdictions. See, e.g., United States v. Outland, 476 F.2d 581 (6th Cir.1973); United States ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430 (7th Cir.1969); United States v. Feldman, 366 F.Supp. 356 (D.Hawaii 1973); Johnson v. State, 617 P.2d 1117 (Alaska 1983); Mehrens v. State, ......
  • Kostelec v. State, No. 2005
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • December 6, 1996
    ...States v. Lowe, 575 F.2d 1193 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 869, 99 S.Ct. 198, 58 L.Ed.2d 180 (1978); U.S. ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430 (7th Cir.1969); United States v. McGriff, 678 F.Supp. 1010 (E.D.N.Y.1988); State v. Stott, 243 Neb. 967, 503 N.W.2d 822 (1993); State v. Engel,......
  • State v. Womack, No. 971539-CA
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Utah
    • October 22, 1998
    ...97 F.3d 669, 670 (2d Cir.1996); United States v. Outland, 476 F.2d 581, 582 n. 1 (6th Cir.1973); United States ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430, 432 (7th Cir.1969), these police practices are not necessary to show probable cause. 4 We For example, without discussing the specific point Wo......
  • State v. Sachs, No. 20019
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 27, 1975
    ...executed until delivery had been accomplished. United States v. Odland, 502 F.2d 148 (7th Cir. 1974); United States ex rel. Beal v. Skaff, 418 F.2d 430 (7th Cir. 1969); People v. Glen, 30 N.Y.2d 252, 331 N.Y.S.2d 656, 282 N.E.2d 614 (1972); United States v. Feldman, 366 F.Supp. 356 (1973); ......
  • 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