Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Sevilla

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 26, 1961No. Crim. 7447Published

1DissentFourt, J.

I dissent.

The facts as set forth in the majority opinion should be extended in some respects. The officers knew the defendant was an old-time narcotics offender with whom they had dealt on several occasions. The probabilities are great that knowing of his background and his record as they did, they knew Sevilla to be an ex-convict. They knew of his habits and the course of conduct he followed when he had heroin in his possession. The officers also suspected, and with good reason, that Heredia was not only a user of narcotics but a peddler and they were staked out and watching Heredia’s place.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  2. Snyder v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Palko v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  4. Malinski v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  5. People v. HaeusslerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API