Legal Opinion
United States v. Kirschenblatt
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided December 6, 1926No. 88PublishedCited by 110 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The officers’ entry under the warrant was lawful, the warrant itself being sufficiently supported by the affidavits. The arrest was also lawful, so that the question is of the officers’ powers to search either under the warrant, or as an incident to the arrest. The prosecution argues that the arrest gave the officers power to search the premises and seize, not only liquors and bottling apparatus, but any incriminatory papers which they found. That the search warrant did not go so far we understand to be agreed; at any rate, so much is plain. It is…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Weeks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Agnello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Gouled v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by110 opinions
- Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Riley v. Cal. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United States v. HeldtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
105 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.