TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Taylor v. State

Taylor v. State, 93 So. 355 (Miss. 1922)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Mississippi Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 15, 1922
Docket
No. 22590
Judges
Cook
Citations
93 So. 355129 Miss. 815
Disposition
Be-versed and appellant discharged.
Syllabus
CRIMINAL Law. Evidence obtained by unlawful search of accused’s private property inadmissible. t In a prosecution for unlawfully possessing intoxicating liquor, evidence obtained by means of . an illegal search of the defendant’s private property is inadmissible.
Summary
Appeal from circuit court of Tate county. Hon. Greek L. Bice, Judge. Herman Taylor was convicted of unlawfully Laving in bis possession intoxicating liquor, and he appeals. As to the fourth assignment the case of Tucker v. State, 90 So. 845 decided since my original brief was filed, should be decisive of the question of the unlawful search, but I desire to invite careful scrutiny of the testimony of the sheriff and constable, of Jake Alexander and the appellant which clearly shows that the three young men were arrested and their buggy searched without a warrant, and at a time when they were not engaged in the commission of a crime, nor were there any circumstances to justify the action of the officers. There was a plain effort to present circumstances to justify the arrests but it wholly failed. They were arrested and searched at a time when they were going quietly along the road, and the sheriff makes it clear that he was not in the habit of taking time to arm himself with a warrant, but in a high and mighty way took them first into the custody and then searched their person and the vehicle. In taking up the fourth assignment of error, which deals with the arrest and search of the buggy in which the appellant was riding, I desire to invite the court’s attention to two recent decisions on this question, which are as follows: Tucker v. State, 90 So. 845; Faulk v. State, 90 So. 481. In the light of these two decisions I submit this question to the wise discretion of the court. It is very evident that no search warrant was used; however, the appellant did not resist the search or object to the officers^ searching the buggy. His silence in the matter would' probably mean the giving of his consent.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Cook

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

Cook, J.,

delivered tlie opinion of the court.

The appellant was convicted in the circuit court of Tate county of unlawfully having in his possession intoxicating liquor, and from the judgment sentencing him to pay a fine and costs he prosecutes this appeal.

The entire evidence upon ivhich this conviction is based was secured as a result of a search of appellant’s buggy by the sheriff and his deputies, and the seizure of certain alleged intoxicating liquor found in the buggy. At the time the search and seizure ivas made the appellant ivas under arrest, and the search ivas made without a search warrant, and without the consent of appellant. The evidence obtained as a result of this illegal search and seizure was inadmissible. Tucker v. State (Miss.), 90 So. 845 ; Williams v. State (Miss.), 92 So. 584 ; Will Butler v. State (Miss.), 98 So. 3 .

For the error of the court below in overruling defendant’s motion to exclude the evidence offered on behalf of the state, and to direct a verdict of not guilty, this cause is reversed, and judgment entered here discharging the appellant.

Reversed, and appellant discharged.

How later courts describe this case

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

1923: 21925: 11929: 11945: 119232026peak 1923 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Moore v. State103 So. 483 (Miss. 1925)
  2. Smith v. State98 So. 344 (Miss. 1923)
  3. State v. Prescott117 S.E. 637 (S.C. 1923) · Dissent
  4. Price v. State120 So. 751 (Miss. 1929)
  5. Williams v. State23 So. 2d 692 (Miss. 1945)

Most recent

  1. Williams v. State23 So. 2d 692 (Miss. 1945)
  2. Price v. State120 So. 751 (Miss. 1929)
  3. Moore v. State103 So. 483 (Miss. 1925)
  4. Smith v. State98 So. 344 (Miss. 1923)
  5. State v. Prescott117 S.E. 637 (S.C. 1923) · Dissent

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
Tucker v. State, 90 So. 845 (Miss. 1922) 84
Williams v. State, 92 So. 584 (Miss. 1922) 11

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