TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Mills v. United States

Mills v. United States, 89 F.2d 658 (4th Cir. 1937)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
April 10, 1937
Docket
No. 4144
Citations
89 F.2d 6581937 U.S. App. LEXIS 3552

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon conviction of removing and concealing 110 gallons of whisky upon which the tax had not been paid, in violation of 26 U.S.C.A. § 1287 . The facts are that on August 10, 1936, in Pitt county, N. C., members of the North Carolina State Highway Patrol observed the defendant driving a Ford coupé which seemed to be heavily loaded. They stopped defendant and made inquiry oí him as to the nature of the load, when he voluntarily stated that the car was loaded with 110 gallons of whisky. They thereupon searched the car and found 22 5-gallon jugs of whisky upon which the tax had not been paid.

Questions have been raised as to the right of the North Carolina Highway Patrol to search cars suspected of transporting liquor, and as to the rule to be applied in the federal courts where defendants are there prosecuted for offenses discovered by state officers in the course of searches conducted in violation of constitutional rights of defendants. Neither of the questions need be considered, however, as it does not appear that any constitutional right of this defendant was in any respect violated by the officers who arrested him. Before he was arrested or his car searched, he had voluntarily stated that the car was loaded with whisky; and the officers certainly had reasonable ground to believe that a crime was being committed in their presence, to arrest defendant for this reason, and to search the car as an incident of the arrest.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites 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