The Wallace miner. [volume] (Wallace, Idaho) 1907-current, 1915-12-09
THE RIGHT OF SEARCH
IN IDAHO LIQUOR LAW
ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYS MUST
BE EVIDENCE OF LIQUOR
BEING SOLD.

Because of numerous inquiries as /
the duty of peace officers and prose
eutors In enforcing the new liquor LAY
to go into effect in this state the frs
OF the year and commonly referred /
as senate bill No. so. Attorney Gen
eral Peterson has issued statemen
bearing upon the search of privat
residences in which he declares tina
no such search could be legally mad
unless there were advance evidence o
violation Of the law and that an!
search warrant attempted TO be issueS
under these circumstances would be 1
legal nullity and would afford no pro.
lection to the officer acting thereun.
der" The attorney generals state,
ment In part is as follows:
This inquiry has raised very
grave and serious question throughout
the entire state, and 1t is for the pur-
pose of giving such officers the bene.
fit of what | conceive to be the law
and avoiding future legal entangle-
ments, and perhaps personal violence,
that feel impelled to give my views
In the matter this publicity.
Senate bill SO makes the possession
Of intoxicating liquor in the state of
Idaho misdemeanor, and there Is no
question but what this possession ex-
tends to private residence as we'll as
place of business.
The question naturally recurs,
therefore, whether an officer In the
preparation Of case might apply to
magistrate to issue a search warrant
for the purpose of searching private
residence to procure evidence OF the H.
legal possession of liquor, In the alb
sence Of any showing of the illegal
sale OF such liquor in or from such
residence.
Provision of the Law.
Senate bill so provides (Sec. 23)
that the provisions of chapter Is, ses-
sion laws of 1911, are hereby specific
ally extended to and made applicable
In the enforcement of this act, Chap
ter Is referred to, is what is known in
this state as the Search and seizure
act and was intended to make effect
i've the liquor law of the state as en-
acted at that time.
This act provided, among other
things for the issuance of search war
rants, but solely for the purpose of
searching premises where evidence
was at hand showing that Intoxicating
liquor was being illegally disposed of
therein, and had no reference to the
question of the possession Of intoxi-
eating liquor in private residence
which was not being sold or illegally
disposed Of
1T would seem, therefore, that in
specifically reenacting this portion OF
the 1911 law, and making no direct
provision for the issuance of search
warrants for searching residences
where no evidence is at hand tending
to show the Illegal sale OF liquor, tina.
the legislature had no intention OF au-
thorizing search OF private residences
under these circumstances, and by
specific reference to this chapter of the |
1911 laws 1t would seem it was the in |
tention of the legislature to limit pub |
He officers to the searches authorized |
BY said chapter.
Must Have Evidence.
Il have no hesitancy in saying that
The searching of private residences
'or the purpose of ascertainng whe-
her intoxicating liquor is there, with
'ut evidence OF its being sold or llle-
rally disposed of, is such wide de-
'arture from what has heretofore
'een considered a citizens inalienable
lights that to authorize such search
md to justify an officer in making
UGH search and issuing such warrant
he legislature would be compelled to
e explicit and certain In all its direc. ,
Ions to such officers.
Our constitution provides that the
itizens of the state shall be protect
against unreasonable searches and 7
eizures. The provision of the consti- Ia
ltion referred TO is as follows: a
The right of the people to be Sc C
IRE in their persons. papers, and eff h
'ets against unreasonable searches .
nd seizures shall not be violated and d
warrant shall issue without prob L
Die cause shown by affidavit partic- Il
arly describing the place to be &
arched and the person or thing TO Is
searched for a
Attorney Generals Conclusion. o
This provision of the constitution pi
IS been almost uniformly construed e.
prevent violation of mans home dl
cept under most extraordinary cir
instances and under specific and d. er
e legislative direction. This provi- nj
m would have the effect, | am sat &C
led. of causing our court to look hs
'ictly into the right of an officer TO ha
arch the home of citizen or resi- So
ut of this state and, as stated above wi
specific authority or direction is Sc
zen, but on the contrary, the enact
mt of chapter Is, session laws Of as
=, would seem to imply beyond Nc
estion that the legislature intended of
riches to be had only in cases in ito
wing other than private residences. co,
must be understood that what is as
has