United States v. Ray & Schultz

• Decision Date: 31 October 1921
• Docket Number: 7448.
• Citation: 275 F. 1004
• Parties: UNITED STATES v. RAY & SCHULTZ.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan

275 F. 1004

UNITED STATES v. RAY & SCHULTZ.

No. 7448.

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division.

October 31, 1921

Stein McClear & Sarbaugh, of Detroit, Mich., for petitioner.

John E Kinnane, of Bay City, Mich., U.S. Dist. Atty.

TUTTLE District Judge.

This is a petition by the above-named defendant, praying for an order for the return of certain liquor alleged to have been seized upon a search warrant improperly and unlawfully issued, in violation of the rights of petitioner under the federal Constitution. It is charged that the District Attorney for this district proposes to use said liquor at the trial of the petitioner in this cause in violation of said constitutional rights. It is alleged that the search warrant in question was insufficient and void for various reasons mentioned in the petition and discussed in the brief filed on behalf of petitioner.

The principal ground upon which the validity of such search warrant is challenged is that it was not issued upon probable cause, in that the affidavit in support thereof did not allege the necessary jurisdictional facts. The question presented is whether such affidavit was sufficient in law to justify the issuance of said search warrant. The affidavit referred to was in the following language:

'Before the subscriber, a United States commissioner in and for the Eastern district of Michigan, at the city of Detroit, in said district, personally appeared J. W. Jordan, chief federal prohibition agent, Detroit, Michigan, who, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

'1. That he has good reasons to believe and does believe that in and upon and by the use of certain premises and within said premises, to wit, at the premises located on West Jefferson avenue, being the Riverview Hotel building, occupied by one J. W. Beaton and John Doe, a fraud upon the government of the United States has been and is being committed; that is to say, that the said J. W. Beaton and John Doe and other persons connected with and assisting in the conduct and management of said place and resorting therein, whose names are to this affiant unknown, upon and by the use of the premises aforesaid, are engaged in the unlawful sale and possession of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the National Prohibition Act.

'2. That in and upon the premises aforesaid, and particularly in the Riverview Hotel building aforesaid, and in the possession of the said J. W. Beaton and John Doe and other persons unknown, is a certain large quantity of intoxicating liquors used in connection with the sale thereof, the exact kind and quantity of same being to this deponent at this time unknown.

'Wherefore this affiant prays that a search warrant may issue, authorizing him to search the said premises pursuant to the statute in such case made and provided.'

The Fourth Amendment to the federal Constitution is as follows:

'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'

Section 25 of title 2 of the National Prohibition Act (41 Stat. 315) contains the following provision:

'It shall be unlawful to have or possess any liquor or property designed for the manufacture of liquor intended for use in...