Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Evidence

Michigan Law Review

Search and seizure

1956

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Criminal Procedure - Availablity Of Federal Court Injunction To Prevent Federal Officer From Testifying In State Court As To Illegally-Obtained Evidence, Edward C. Hanpeter Jan 1956

Criminal Procedure - Availablity Of Federal Court Injunction To Prevent Federal Officer From Testifying In State Court As To Illegally-Obtained Evidence, Edward C. Hanpeter

Michigan Law Review

Prosecution of petitioner in federal court for the unlawful acquisition of marihuana failed when the court granted petitioner's motion to suppress the marihuana as evidence because it was obtained by a search based on an invalid search warrant. The federal officer who had seized the marihuana then swore to a complaint before a state judge, and a warrant for petitioner's arrest for violation of state law issued. While awaiting trial, petitioner filed a motion in federal district court to enjoin the federal officer from testifying in the state court. The district court denied the injunction, and the court of appeals …


Criminal Procedure - Searches And Seizures - Admissibility Of Evidence Obtained Through Unlawful Search And Seizure, Neil Flanagin S.Ed. Jan 1956

Criminal Procedure - Searches And Seizures - Admissibility Of Evidence Obtained Through Unlawful Search And Seizure, Neil Flanagin S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendants were prosecuted and convicted of conspiring to engage in horserace bookmaking and related offenses. The police had secured evidence of defendants' activities by concealing a listening device in premises occupied by them and also by unauthorized and forcible searches. The trial court admitted the evidence so obtained, notwithstanding the fact that the police action in securing it was clearly in violation of both federal and state constitutions and statutes. After conviction, the trial court denied defendants' motion for a new trial. On appeal, held, reversed, three justices dissenting. Evidence obtained in violation of the defendants' constitutional rights is …