Legal Opinion

People v. Yet Ning Yee

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 30, 1956No. Crim. 3184PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.

On the ground of an unlawful search and seizure under the rule of People v. Cahan, 44 Cal.2d 434 [282 P.2d 905], an information charging defendant with violation of section 11500, Health and Safety Code (possession of heroin), was dismissed. Plaintiff appealed.

Question Presented

Under the circumstances here, did a search warrant authorizing search of described premises and of one Jack Yee authorize search of defendant (another person than Jack Yee) present there ?

Record

Federal Narcotics Agent Prziborowski filed in a municipal court of San Mateo County an affidavit that he had reasonable cause…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. United States v. RabinowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. People v. CahanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Badillo v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. People v. SimonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  5. People v. BoylesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. People v. SheltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  2. People v. SheltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  3. People v. HillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  4. People v. DewsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. People v. TahtinenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958

12 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