Legal Opinion

Nekruta v. State

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 11, 1929No. 10273Published

1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.

Referring to Laning on Criminal Law, page 705, it is held that an officer was not justified in searching the residence where the pursuit and arrest was in connection with the possession of counterfeit money, and in State vs Andrew, 91 W. Va. 720, 114 S. E. 257, the same ruling was made.

In United States vs Slusser, 270 Fed. 818, it was held:

“A search that is unlawful when it begins is not lawful when it ends by the discovery and seizure of intoxicating liquor or other property being used unlawfully. It was against such prying on the chance of discovery that the constitutional amendment was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. SlusserDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1921
  2. United States v. RembertDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1922
  3. State v. AndrewsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Blatnik v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 1926
  5. Hendershot v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API