State v. Holladay

112 S.E. 827, 120 S.C. 154, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 94
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedJuly 5, 1922
Docket10900
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 112 S.E. 827 (State v. Holladay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Holladay, 112 S.E. 827, 120 S.C. 154, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 94 (S.C. 1922).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Fraser.

This is an indictment for manufacturing, unlawfully receiving, and unlawfully having in possession alcoholic liquors.

There is only one point in the case. It is claimed by appellant that the search warrant under which the search and seizure were made was illegal, in that the Magistrate did not actually swear the affiant. The warrant was issued on the affidavit of one Peavy. The Magistrate testified:

“A. He said, T want to make this affidavit before you,’ and he signed it. Q. And you signed your name? A. Yes, sir. Q. But you didn’t actually swear him? A. He knew he was swearing to it. Q. Did you deliver to him the oath? A. No, sir; he did not hold up his right hand and swear. Q. And you didn’t swear him? A. Only by him saying he wanted to make the affidavit. Q. You didn’t swear him, and he didn’t make the oath before you? A. Only as I explained to you.”
“By Mr. McLeod: Did or not Mr. Peavy know he was taking an oath? A. He did, sir.”

That was sufficient.

The exceptions are overruled, and the judgment affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Gary and Mr. Justices Cothran and Marion concur.

*156 Mr. Justice Cothran

: I do not think that the affidavit was properly sworn to, but that the objection to the admission of the search warrant upon that ground was waived.

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

Related

Omid Petrelli v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2017
People v. Coles
141 Misc. 2d 965 (New York Supreme Court, 1988)
People v. Ramos
424 N.W.2d 509 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1988)
In Re Petition for Removal of Rice
181 N.E.2d 742 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1962)
Farrow v. State
1941 OK CR 48 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1941)
State v. Tull
62 S.W.2d 389 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1933)
Hodge v. Sovereign Camp Woodmen of World
146 S.E. 220 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 S.E. 827, 120 S.C. 154, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-holladay-sc-1922.