TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ford v. State

Ernest Ford v. State.

Ford v. State, 1926 OK CR 179, 245 P. 909
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
May 1, 1926
Docket
No. A-5424.
Judges
Bessey, Doyle, Edwards
Citations
245 P. 9091926 OK CR 17934 Okla. Crim. 1841926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 421

Opinion of the Court — Bessey

BESSEY, P. J.

Ernest Ford, plaintiff in error, here referred to as the defendant, was convicted of having illegal possession of whisky, with his punishment assessed at 30 days in jail and a fine of $50.

The evidence shows that the defendant and one Red Jones jointly operated a public rooming house on the second floor of a certain building in Ardmore; that of *185 .fleers searched the premises under authority of a search warrant, and in a locked compartment at the foot of the rear stairs, where the water heater for the rooming house was operated, they found 11 gallons of whisky. ’The defendant denied that the whisky was his, and stated that he had no key to this compartment, but that Red Jones had a key.

The defendant urges that the whisky seized in this heating plant room on the ground floor of this building was taken in an illegal search and seizure, and that the evidence so secured was therefore inadmissible.

The evidence shows that this rooming house was a place of public resort, and subject to search under proper process. It shows that this heating plant room was a part of the rooming house premises. Ordinarily, a search warrant covers the curtilage and appurtenances of the place described. Moreover, a rooming house is not clothed with the protection accorded a private residence.

The element of unlawful intent was sufficiently stated in the instructions, and the evidence was sufficient to establish all the elements of the offense charged.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

DOYLE and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1933: 11968: 11980: 11991: 11996: 12012: 119332026peak 1933 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. Vicars299 N.W.2d 421 (Neb. 1980)
  2. People v. Fitzwater260 Cal. App. 2d 478 (1968)
  3. Wingo v. State1933 OK CR 33, 20 P.2d 586
  4. UNITED STATES of America v. Forrest GORMAN104 F.3d 272 (9th Cir. 1996)
  5. State v. Basurto807 P.2d 162 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991)
  6. United States v. Hibbs905 F. Supp. 2d 862 (C.D. Ill. 2012)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Hibbs905 F. Supp. 2d 862 (C.D. Ill. 2012)
  2. UNITED STATES of America v. Forrest GORMAN104 F.3d 272 (9th Cir. 1996)
  3. State v. Basurto807 P.2d 162 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991)
  4. State v. Vicars299 N.W.2d 421 (Neb. 1980)
  5. People v. Fitzwater260 Cal. App. 2d 478 (1968)
  6. Wingo v. State1933 OK CR 33, 20 P.2d 586

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list