Legal Opinion

Hardesty v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided November 2, 1908No. 1,802PublishedCited by 4 opinions

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Tennessee.

1Per curiam

We have given this case careful consideration, and fail to find any ground upon which the judgment should be reversed. The evidence elicited through the use of a search warrant, and to which objection was made, was admissible, however irregular the search warrant may have been, and however improper its use for the purpose of securing evidence. Adams v. New York, 192 U. S. 585, 24 Sup. Ct. 372, 48 L. Ed. 575. Aside from this, the warrant is not in evidence, and no error has been assigned in relation to it, or the evidence which was discovered by its use. It is admissible for this court to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Adams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1904

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ripper v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
  2. New York Cent. & H. R. R. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1908
  3. City of Sioux Falls v. WalserSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Hartman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API