Gardner v. State
This text of 1926 OK CR 180 (Gardner v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The plaintiffs in error, hereinafter called defendants, were convicted in the county court of Oklahoma county on a charge of maintaining a place where liquors were kept for the purpose of sale. The evidence upon which a conviction was had was obtained under a search warrant issued by the police judge of Oklahoma City. Under the prohibitory liquor law, a search warrant may be issued only by judges of courts of rec *184 ord and justices of the peace (section 7009, Comp. Stat. 1921), and, where a search warrant in a liquor case is issued by a police judge, it is a nullity, and evidence obtained by it should be excluded on timely objection. Terry et al. v. State, 31 Okla. Cr. 91, 237 P. 465; Reinhart v. State, 32 Okla. Cr. 109, 240 P. 139; Cook v. State, 33 Okla. Cr. 54, 242 P. 277. In this case motion to suppress the evidence before entering upon the trial was made, and objection made at the time evidence was interposed.
For the reasons assigned, the case is reversed and remanded, with instructions to dismiss.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1926 OK CR 180, 245 P. 911, 34 Okla. Crim. 183, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-state-oklacrimapp-1926.