Case ID: sw2d_3/html/1111-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MORROW, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

RODGERIS v. STATE.
    (No. 10802.)
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    March 7, 1928.
    Criminal law <&wkey;394 — Evidence obtained from search of defendant’s house under warrant based on affidavit which failed to state facts held inadmissible in liquor prosecution.
    Evidence obtained on search of defendant’s house under search warrant based on affidavit which failed to set forth any facts or circumstances as ground for belief on which search warrant might be issued held inadmissible, in prosecution for possessing liquor for sale.
    Appeal from District Court, Taylor County; W. R. Ely, Judge.
    Felix Rodgeris was convicted of possessing liquor for the purpose, of sale, and he appeals. .
    Reversed and remanded.
    Kirby, King & Overshiner, of Abilene, for appellant.
    Sam D. Stinson, State’s Atty., and Robt. M. Lyles, Asst. State’s Atty., both of Austin, for the State.
   MORROW, P. J.

The offense is the possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of three years.

A search of the appellant’s house resulted in the discovery of about three pints of whis-ky. The appellant’s wife was endeavoring to mix it with dishwater. Appellant introduced no testimony, and the only evidence in the record is that coming from the officers who searched the premises.

- There are several bills of exceptions, but only one may be noticed. Therefrom it appears that the search warrant upon which the officers who searched the premises acted was based upon an affidavit in which there was set forth no fact or circumstance as ground, for the belief upon which the search warrant sought might be issued. Objection having been urged to the testimony showing the result of the search, the testimony should not have been received.

There being, no testimony save that mentioned as a predicate for the conviction, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.