Delahunt v. United States

Seventh Circuit

Delahunt v. United States

5 F.2d 1014, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2826

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedMay 13, 1925

DocketNo. 3498

StatusPublished

This text of 5 F.2d 1014 (Delahunt v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Delahunt v. United States, 5 F.2d 1014, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2826 (7th Cir. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted and sentenced upon an indictment charging possession of intoxicating liquor in violation of the National Prohibition Act. His attack on the judgment centers upon the alleged unlawful search without warrant, and seizure of certain kegs of beer in an automobile of which plaintiff in error was in possession, the specific errors relied on being the denial of his motion for a return of the seized beer, and the admission of evidence obtained through the ■search and seizure. Brief for plaintiff in error’ was filed before the decision was handed down by the United States Supreme Court in Carroll and Kiro v. United States, 45 S. Ct. 280, 69 L. Ed. —, decided March 2, 1925, whereby it was definitely settled that, where officers have reasonable ground to believe that an automobile or other conveyance contains contraband liquor, they may lawfully stop and search' the conveyance, and seize any such liquor so found therein. There thus remains here only the question whether the record discloses facts wherefrom the officers had reasonable ground to believe that plaintiff in error had in his possession in this automobile such liquor. It will hardly be controverted that the record is fairly alive with facts and circumstances abundantly showing reasonable ground for the belief that this automobile did then contain unlawful, liquor, as the search disclosed. In this state of the record the judgment must be, and it is, affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted and sentenced upon an indictment charging possession of intoxicating liquor in violation of the National Prohibition Act. His attack on the judgment centers upon the alleged unlawful search without warrant, and seizure of certain kegs of beer in an automobile of which plaintiff in error was in possession, the specific errors relied on being the denial of his motion for a return of the seized beer, and the admission of evidence obtained through the ■search and seizure. Brief for plaintiff in error’ was filed before the decision was handed down by the United States Supreme Court in Carroll and Kiro v. United States, 45 S. Ct. 280, 69 L. Ed. —, decided March 2, 1925, whereby it was definitely settled that, where officers have reasonable ground to believe that an automobile or other conveyance contains contraband liquor, they may lawfully stop and search' the conveyance, and seize any such liquor so found therein. There thus remains here only the question whether the record discloses facts wherefrom the officers had reasonable ground to believe that plaintiff in error had in his possession in this automobile such liquor. It will hardly be controverted that the record is fairly alive with facts and circumstances abundantly showing reasonable ground for the belief that this automobile did then contain unlawful, liquor, as the search disclosed. In this state of the record the judgment must be, and it is, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 F.2d 1014, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delahunt-v-united-states-ca7-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack