City of Shreveport v. Knowles
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Certiorari to First Judicial District Court, Parish of Caddo; T. F. Bell, Judge. I. Knowles was convicted of keeping a blind tiger, and he brings certiorari.
1Opinion of the CourtProvo Sty, J.
[.1,2] Ordinance No. 5, of the city of Shreveport defines a “blind tiger,” declares it to be a nuisance, and imposes a penalty for keeping one. The accused was prosecuted under said ordinance. It seems that for obtaining evidence against him his premises were invaded. He says this was illegal and entailed illegality upon the evidence thereby secured, making said evidence inadmissible. Evidence is not rendered inadmissible by having been secured in an illegal manner. State v. Aspara, 113 La. 941, 37 South. 883.
By comparing said ordinance, as referred to in City of Shreveport v. Maroun, 134 La.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. AsparaSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1904
- Garrett v. AbySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1895
- Welch v. GossensSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1899
- City of Shreveport v. MarounSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1914
- State v. QuinnSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1915
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. GriffinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1952
- City of Shreveport v. NejinSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1917
- State v. LowrySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- State v. BeeneSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1972
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.