Watercutter v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.
The search of defendant’s premises without a search warrant was an illegal act, but that fact does not prevent the introduction of evidence as to what was found by the officers making the search. Being collateral merely, the production of the search warrant is not necessary in making proof that a search was in fact made.
If the parts of the distilling outfit found on defendant’s premises had been offered in evidence, such parts would have been admissible, but, in the absence of the still, evidence describing the xiarts is admissible. The best evidence rule applies exclusively to documentary…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Montgomery v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1983
- Chatom v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1978
- Dunaway v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1973
- Little v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1948
- Whittington v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1983
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.