United States v. Harvey
| Citation | 298 F. 106 |
| Decision Date | 29 March 1924 |
| Docket Number | 8331. |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. HARVEY et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington |
On Motion for Rehearing, April 15, 1924.
C. T McKinney, Asst. U.S. Atty., of Seattle, Wash.
Adam Beeler, of Seattle, Wash., and J. M. Boyle, Jr., of Tacoma Wash., for defendants.
On October 15, 1923, two affidavits for search warrants were filed by federal prohibition agents, stating among other things, that the defendants were in possession of intoxicating liquor fit for beverage purposes on the premises described. One affidavit described the premises as No. 1606 Boylston avenue; the other as No. 1608 Boylston avenue. Search warrants were issued based on such affidavits.
The premises searched are in a one-story, brick-faced garage building, erected in 1919 in front of a large two-story frame dwelling house, which had been constructed about 10 years prior. Over the door of the dwelling house appears the number '1608'; the house being situated on Boylston avenue but the door not opening on such avenue, entrance to the dwelling house being over a walk along the north side of the garage. The base of the dwelling house is on a level with the roof of the garage, the dirt upon the lot on which the garage stands having been removed to the level of the avenue. The garage is divided into two rooms by a concrete wall in the middle, with an opening or entrance from one room to the other. One Fred Noel is the lessee of the garage, but physically occupies only room No. 1606, having sublet the other room. Upon the roof, above the door, extending over the south room, No. 1606, and more than two-thirds of the distance across the north room, is a large sign reading Immediately over the door in large letters appears the word 'Brakes,' and underneath that word, 'Fred Noel-- Phone East 478.' Over the door of the other room is the caption: 'Oakland Specialists.' In both rooms are large glass double doors, provided for the entrance and exit of automobiles. Fifteen panes of glass are in each door, five panes high. Across the middle panes of the door to the north room are the figures '1608' and on the pane next to the figure '8' appears the figures '1/2.' These figures are painted, the '1/2' being somewhat blurred. Ordinance 4635 of the city of Seattle provides that the numerical designation of all entrances to buildings, etc., following upon the avenues, streets,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The State v. Catalino
...as to readily enable the officer to locate it and the statute in this regard was complied with. [Bragg v. State, 290 S.W. 1; United States v. Harvey, 298 F. 106; Smith v. McDuffee, 72 Ore. 276; Ann. Cas. 1916D, and note.] Ordinarily the description of the property by a street and number is ......
-
Chruscicki v. Hinrichs
...United States v. Borkowski (D. C.) 268 F. 408, 411. See, also, McSherry v. Heimer, 132 Minn. 260, 156 N. W. 130, 131;United States v. Harvey (D. C.) 298 F. 106, 108. [1] Wisconsin has adopted the prevailing rule. “ ‘Nice or technical descriptions are not required. A description pointing out......
-
United States v. Callahan
...the identity of the premises being apparent from the description as a whole." Other authorities in point are the following: United States v. Harvey (D. C.) 298 F. 106; United States v. McGuire (D. C.) 300 F. 98; Giacolone v. United States (C. C. A.) 13 F.(2d) Thirdly, was the period of 13 d......
-
State v. Catalino
...readily enable the officer to locate it, and the statute in this regard was complied with. Bragg v. State (Tenn.) 290 S. W. 1; U. S. v. Harvey (D. C.) 298 F. 106; Smith v. McDuffee, 72 Or. 276, 142 P. 558, 143 P. 929, Ann. Cas. 1916D, 947, and note. Ordinarily, the description of the proper......