Home >> Bouvier's Law Dictionary >> Safe to Smuggling >> Search Warrant_P1

Search Warrant

officer, ed, justice, person, mass, ct and sup

Page: 1 2

SEARCH WARRANT. A warrant requir ing the officer to whom it is addressed to search a house, or other place, therein spec ified, for property therein alleged to have been stolen, and, if the same shall be found upon such search, to bring the goods so found, together with the body of the person occupying the same, who is named, before the justice or other officer granting the warrant, or some other justice of the peace, or other lawfully authorized officer.

It should be given under the hand and seal of the justice, and dated.

The United States laws provide for the search in the daytime only, by any custom house officer under a search warrant ; R. S. § 3066. Ownership in some specific person must be alleged in the information ; State v. Intoxicating Liquors, 64 Ia. 300, 20 N. W. 445.

See The constitution of the United States, Amendm. art. 4, declares that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreason able searches and seizures, shall not be vio lated; and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirma tion, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or thing to be seized." See Sailly v. Smith, 11 Johns. (N. Y.) 500; Ex parte Burford, 3 Cra. (U. S.) 448, 2 L. Ed. 495 ; Boyd v. U. S., 116 U. S. 616, 6 Sup. Ct. 524, 29 L. Ed. 746. This does not apply to the states ; Nat. Safe Dep. Co. v. Stead, 232 U. S. 58, 34 *Sup. Ct.• 209, 58 L. Ed.

Originally search warrants were used al most exclusively for the discovery of stolen property, but of late years their use has been extended to searches for intoxicating liquors; State v. Whiskey, 54 N. H. 164 ; Com. v. In toxicating Liquors, 150 Mass. 164, 22 N. E. 628; gaming implements ; Com. v. Gaming Implements, 119 id. 332 ; and the like. The constitutional provision does not prevent the issue of search warrants for the seizure of gambling paraphernalia and other illegal matter ; Adams v. New York, 192 U. S. 585, 24 Sup. Ct. 372, 48 L. Ed. 575 ; or the seizure of articles and papers by internal revenue of ficers under a search warrant while making a raid on defendant's place of business for an alleged violation of the oleomargarine act ; May v. U. S., 199 Fed. 53, 117 C. C. A. 431;

nor under Chinese exclusion proceedings; Chin Wah v Colwell, 187 Fed. 592, 109 C. C.

A. 422; nor the seizure of infringing copies of copyrighted articles or the use thereof as evidence; American Tobacco Co. v. Werck meister, 207 U. S. 284, 28 Sup. Ct. 72, 52 L. Ed. 208, 12 Ann. Cas. 595.

Hale, 2 Pl. Cr. 149, recommends great cau tion in granting such warrants:-first, that they be not granted without oath made before a justice of a felony committed, and that the complainant has probable cause to suspect that the goods are in such a house or place, and his reason for such suspicion; see 2 Wils. 283 ; 1 Dowl. & R. 97: State v. Mann, 27 N. C. 45; Humes v. Taber, 1 R. I. 464; second, that such warrants express that the search shall be made in the daytime (but in this country this limitation is not observed); State v. Brennan's Liquors, 25 Conn. 278; Corn. v. Hinds, 145 Mass. 182, 13 N. E. 397; third, that they ought to be directed to a constable or other proper officer, and not to a private person ; fourth, that they ought to command the officer to bring the stolen goods, and the person in whose custody they are, before some justice of the peace. See 6 B. & C. 332 ; Stone v. Dana, 5 Mete. (Mass.) 98. They should designate the place to be searched ; 1 M. & W. 255; Com. v. Dana, 2 Mete. (Mass.) 329; Bell v. Clapp, 10 Johns. (N. Y.) 263, 6 Am. Dec. 339.

The description "suspected place" is not sufficient ; People v. Holcomb, 3 Parker, Cr. R. (N. Y.) 656. It has been said that "the description of the place to be searched should be as certain in a warrant as would be neces sary in a deed to convey such place ;" Jones v. Fletcher, 41 Me. 254. Trespass will not lie against a party who has procured a search warrant to search for stolen goods, if the warrant be duly issued and regularly execut ed ; Beaty v. Perkins, 6 Wend. (N. Y.) 382, but if the warrant itself shows that the mag istrate had no jurisdiction, the officer who serves it will be a trespasser ; 19 How. St. Tr. 1029; State v. Mann, 27 N. C. 45. And see Hayden. v. Shed, 11 Mass. 500.

Page: 1 2