United States v. Dean
| Citation | 50 F.2d 905 |
| Decision Date | 27 May 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 9869.,9869. |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. DEAN. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts |
Frederick H. Tarr, U. S. Atty. and Elihu D. Stone, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Boston, Mass., for plaintiff.
Benjamin F. Evarts, of Holyoke, Mass., for defendant.
This is a motion to suppress evidence obtained on a search without a warrant of the defendant's premises.
The facts are as follows: The defendant, Dean, is a farmer, and lives on his farm in Adams, Mass. The buildings are about six hundred feet from the highway, and are reached by a private way. They consist of a dwelling house and a garage about fifty feet apart. Suspecting that illegal distillation was going on there, federal and state officers drove to the place on the night in question and went into the yard. Either in the private road or in the yard, the officers smelled odors of distillation or of mash. Dean was at home; he refused to give the officers permission to enter the garage, which was dark and was locked, saying he had leased it to one Denby. The officers thereupon broke the lock and entered. It contained distilling apparatus and two automobiles which belonged to Dean. The officers searched the building and ordered Dean to appear before the United States commissioner on the following morning. No arrest was made at that time. On the evidence so obtained, Dean has been indicted for manufacturing intoxicating liquor and possessing property designed for that purpose.
The search was clearly illegal. Officers have no right to enter private buildings without legal justification. Where officers have knowledge that a person in the building is in the act of committing a felony, or possibly a misdemeanor, they may enter without a warrant in order to arrest him and to suppress the crime, and they may enter to arrest a person against whom a warrant is out or who is reasonably suspected of having committed a felony. I am aware of no other cases in which officers are justified in forcing an entrance without a warrant into private property. These principles have been so often stated that a citation of authorities is perhaps unnecessary, but the following may be referred to: Amos v. U. S., 255 U. S. 313, 41 S. Ct. 266, 65 L. Ed. 654; Raniele v. U. S., 34 F.(2d) 877 (C. C. A. 8); Temperani v. U. S., 299 F. 365 (C. C. A. 9); U. S. v. Di Corvo (D. C.) 37 F.(2d) 124 (discussing cases); Russell v. State, 37 Okl. Cr. 71, 256 P. 758.
The only special circumstance in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. United States
...163—164, 247 F.2d 568, 569—570; Grainger v. United States, 4 Cir., 158 F.2d 236. A District Court has held otherwise. United States v. Dean, D.C.Mass., 50 F.2d 905, 906. The Government urges us to follow the body of Court of Appeals' decisions and to rule that the lower courts, including th......
-
United States v. Lerner, 19261.
...in the garage, they had the right to pursue him into the adjoining house without a search warrant or a warrant of arrest. United States v. Dean, D.C., 50 F.2d 905; 6 C.J.S., Arrest, § 14, p. 615; Brooks v. Commonwealth, 61 Pa. 352, 358, 100 Am.Dec. The critical question then is whether the ......
-
State v. Pruett
...ownership and knowledge in and of the searched vehicle. There is no assertion by the state here as by the government in United States v. Dean, D.C.Mass., 50 F.2d 905, that the property searched was in possession of the defendant thereby negativing any entitlement to the benefit of defendant......
-
United States v. Petti
...authority to gain access to the hotel room with the manager's consent, and to wait there for the appellant's return. See United States v. Dean, D.C. Mass., 50 F.2d 905. Thus the arrest was lawful and the search incidental thereto was likewise The appellant contends that the traveler's check......