Simpson v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
RUDKIN, Circuit Judge.
This was a prosecution under the Bone Dry Act of Alaska (39 Stat. 903 [48 U.S.C.A. § 261 et seq.]). A demurrer to the complaint or information was overruled, and after the jury was impaneled the defendant objected to further proceedings or to the introduction of any testimony in the case for the following reasons: First, because the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime; second, because all evidence in the case was procured by an unreasonable and illegal search; third, because all evidence in the case was obtained by officers of the United States…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Abbate v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
- Koppitz v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
3Cited by4 opinions
- Peterson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1924
- United States v. BerkenessCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1926
- Stanworth v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1930
- United States v. BolandDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1923