Case ID: f_164/html/0420-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HARDESTY et al. v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
    November 2, 1908.)
    No. 1,802.
    Criminar Daw (§ 894) — Evidence—Evidence Unlawfully Obtained.
    It is no objection to tbe admissibility of evidence which is pertinent to the issue in a criminal case that it was obtained by means of a search warrant illegally issued or executed.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. § 875; Dec. Dig. § 394.] .
    In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Tennessee.
    
      Henry M. Johnson, for plaintiffs in error.
    George Randolph, for the United States.
    Before BURTON, SEVERENS, and RICHARDS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PER CURIAM.

We have given this case careful consideration, and fail to find any ground upon which the judgment should be reversed. The evidence elicited through the use of a search warrant, and to which objection was made, was admissible, however irregular the search warrant may have been, and however improper its use for the purpose of securing evidence. Adams v. New York, 192 U. S. 585, 24 Sup. Ct. 372, 48 L. Ed. 575. Aside from this, the warrant is not in evidence, and no error has been assigned in relation to it, or the evidence which was discovered by its use. It is admissible for this court to consider a plain error though not assigned. No such appears in respect of any illegal use of a search warrant.

Judgment affirmed.