Pizzitolo v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Pizzitolo v. United States

64 F.2d 680, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 4194

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 29, 1933

DocketNo. 6652

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 64 F.2d 680 (Pizzitolo v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pizzitolo v. United States, 64 F.2d 680, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 4194 (5th Cir. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of the unlawful possession and transportation of intoxicating liquor, and complains because the liquor was taken out of his automobile by prohibition agents who had no search warrant. The agents testified that they made the search and seizure without a warrant under the following circumstances: Their superior officer had furnished them with a description and license numbers of several automobiles which he said were being used to deliver liquor; told them the drivers of the automobiles obtained orders for liquor from a certain garage, then went to a storage place and got the liquor, and from there to the places where they intended to make deliveries. On this oc-[681]*681easion appellant parked his ear and went into the office of the garage, came out, got into his automobile, and drove to his home. The agents followed him, waited near his home until he came out. Appellant in a few minutes drove off in his car; as he did so he recognized the agents and turned into a side street. At the next corner he was driving so fast that his car turned over. The officers drove back to appellant’s house and waited for him to return. He came in the hack way; about that time they heard that his car had turned over, and went to it where they found the liquor. There cannot he any doubt that under these circumstances the prohibition agents had the right without a warrant to search appellant’s automobile. Carroll v. United States, 267 U. S. 132, 45 S. Ct. 280, 69 L. Ed. 543, 39 A. L. R. 790.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of the unlawful possession and transportation of intoxicating liquor, and complains because the liquor was taken out of his automobile by prohibition agents who had no search warrant. The agents testified that they made the search and seizure without a warrant under the following circumstances: Their superior officer had furnished them with a description and license numbers of several automobiles which he said were being used to deliver liquor; told them the drivers of the automobiles obtained orders for liquor from a certain garage, then went to a storage place and got the liquor, and from there to the places where they intended to make deliveries. On this oc-[681]*681easion appellant parked his ear and went into the office of the garage, came out, got into his automobile, and drove to his home. The agents followed him, waited near his home until he came out. Appellant in a few minutes drove off in his car; as he did so he recognized the agents and turned into a side street. At the next corner he was driving so fast that his car turned over. The officers drove back to appellant’s house and waited for him to return. He came in the hack way; about that time they heard that his car had turned over, and went to it where they found the liquor. There cannot he any doubt that under these circumstances the prohibition agents had the right without a warrant to search appellant’s automobile. Carroll v. United States, 267 U. S. 132, 45 S. Ct. 280, 69 L. Ed. 543, 39 A. L. R. 790.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 F.2d 680, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 4194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pizzitolo-v-united-states-ca5-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack