Legal Opinion
Bowyer v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 9, 1974No. Civ. 33498PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RATTIGAN, J.
We hold in this proceeding that certain evidence must be suppressed because a so-called “telephonic search warrant,” pursuant to which the evidence was seized, was wholly invalid in the absence of a writing as prescribed by statute.
A three-count information filed in respondent court jointly charged petitioners Chester and Mary Bowyer, Keith Robinson and James Thomason with possession of two contraband substances (LSD and a methylenedioxy amphetamine) in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11350, and with possession of marijuana in violation of section 11357. The…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Harris v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- United States v. LefkowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Sgro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- People v. RamosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. ValenciaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
- State v. HaddCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1980
- Nunes v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- People v. PeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.