Commonwealth v. Certain Intoxicating Liquors

109 Mass. 371
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1872
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 109 Mass. 371 (Commonwealth v. Certain Intoxicating Liquors) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Commonwealth v. Certain Intoxicating Liquors, 109 Mass. 371 (Mass. 1872).

Opinion

Gkay, J.

The St. of 1869, c. 415, § 46, in accordance with the principles of the common law and of the fourteenth article of our Declaration of Rights, requires that in cases like this “ the complaint shall particularly designate so as to identify the building, structure and place to be searched,” and that it shall be set out in the warrant “ by special designation and with the same particularity as in the complaint.”

The complaint in the present case, after designating the building and place, in which the liquors are alleged to be kept, as a certain building numbered 31 on Tremont Street in Boston, adds, “ and the first floor and cellar of said building and the back room over the rear part of the store in said building.” The effect of this addition, in the opinion of a majority of the court, was to restrict the place designated ; for, as the first floor of a building is necessarily a part of it, the words “ and the first floor ” could not have been intended to designate another place not already included in the more general description, and can only operate as a further description of the same place, limiting it to the specified parts of the building. Commonwealth v. Intoxicating Liquors, 107 Mass. 216.

If the recital in the warrant, though not expressed in precisely the same words, might be interpreted as corresponding to the description in the complaint, the mandatory clause is certainly not so restricted, but in accordance with the prayer of the complaint directs the officer to enter and search the whole building, including the part not included in the description in the complaint, nor designated on the oath of the complainant, as the law [373]*373requires. The warrant is therefore wholly void, and the complaint should have been dismissed.

Warrant quashed, and complaint dismissed

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Rose v. State
87 N.E. 103 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1909)
Commonwealth v. Certain Intoxicating Liquors
16 N.E. 298 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1888)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
109 Mass. 371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-certain-intoxicating-liquors-mass-1872.