United States v. Rosenthal

E.D. New York

United States v. Rosenthal

116 F. Supp. 873, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2330

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York

DecidedDecember 2, 1953

DocketCr. No. 43358

StatusPublished

This text of 116 F. Supp. 873 (United States v. Rosenthal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Rosenthal, 116 F. Supp. 873, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2330 (E.D.N.Y. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

RAYFIEL, District Judge.

The petition of the defendant herein seeks an order suppressing any and all evidence obtained by agents of the Alcohol Tax Unit on August 18th, 1953, by means of an unlawful search of the defendant’s automobile and person and through the seizure thereafter effected, and restraining the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York from using such evidence. John T. Miller, one of the agents who made the search and seizure concedes that he did not have a search warrant or a warrant of arrest. The Government argues that notwithstanding that fact the agents were justified in making the search and seizure because there was probable cause for believing that an offense had been committed by the defendant. Miller’s affidavit falls far short of persuading me that there was such probable cause.

Accordingly, the defendant’s motion for relief hereinabove set forth is granted.

Settle order on notice.

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

RAYFIEL, District Judge.

The petition of the defendant herein seeks an order suppressing any and all evidence obtained by agents of the Alcohol Tax Unit on August 18th, 1953, by means of an unlawful search of the defendant’s automobile and person and through the seizure thereafter effected, and restraining the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York from using such evidence. John T. Miller, one of the agents who made the search and seizure concedes that he did not have a search warrant or a warrant of arrest. The Government argues that notwithstanding that fact the agents were justified in making the search and seizure because there was probable cause for believing that an offense had been committed by the defendant. Miller’s affidavit falls far short of persuading me that there was such probable cause.

Accordingly, the defendant’s motion for relief hereinabove set forth is granted.

Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 F. Supp. 873, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-rosenthal-nyed-1953.