Evening star., 1952-11-16
UphoIding the Prosecutor

The decision of the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia in the
Cefarati case will make for more effective law
enforcement in Washington BY acknowledging
the right of the Government to appeal from
lower court orders suppressing evidence in GRIM
inal cases, the appellate court has greatly
strengthened the hand of the prosecutor. Denial
OF the right in the past has brought an abrupt
ending to many prosecutions which the United
States Attorney felt were based on sound evil
dence, despite contrary rulings in the lower
courts. s5se..tr-ha e.~ e9t-
There has been much criticism by police and
prosecution authorities of rigid application of
the general rule that the Government may not
interrupt criminal proceedings by appeals from
judicial rulings, however adverse they might
be to the Governments case. The Senate Crime
Committee reported that many important
criminal prosecutions, particularly for narcotics
and gambling offenses, are lost before they are
brought to trial when the court grants a motion
to suppress the evidence on which the prose-
cution is relying" The committee recommended
special legislation to assure the Government
Of the right to appeal from such decisions.
The Court of Appeals by two-to-one vote
held that the law against appeals from any
but final judgments of a court is broad enough
to permit appeals from judicial ruling that
in effect, blocks further action against a de-
fendant. Such a ruling was made by the
District Court in the case of Anthony A. Cefar-
atti, on trial for possession of narcotics. At
torneyS for the defendant moved to suppress
the evidence, consisting of a quantity of il
licit drugs seized in Cefaratti's car, on the
ground that since the officers lacked search
warrant the seizure was illegal. The District
Court granted the suppress motion. The Gov
ernment's appeal from this ruling was chal-
lenged on the basis of the restriction on appeals
except from final judgments
But the appellate majority Circuit Judges
Edgerton and Miller has held that insofar as
further prosecution of Cefaratti was concerned
the suppression of the Governments evidence
was final judgment" Judge Edgerton, who
wrote the opinion, pointed out that the Gov
ernment's case would have collapsed without the
drug evidence and verdict of acquittal for
Cefaratti would have followed in natural course.
In this case, moreover, the appellate court found
that the District Court had been in error in
Suppressing the evidence. The appellate judges
cited Supreme Court decisions upholding the
validity of searches and seizures without war;
rants in cases involving such movable hiding
places as automobiles and boats. So the
Cefaratti trial will be resumed where it was
cut off by the suppression Of the prosecution S
evidence.
Chief Judge Stephens dissented from the
majority ruling that the Government may ap-
peal in such instances. He said he thought the
court should not broaden the right OF appeal
by the Government in criminal cases unless
there is specific statutory authority for so doing
He pointed out that the "rule of flnality" gov
erning appeals served the purpose of preventing
interrupted trials and piecemeal appeals "
A>Nhat should not be overlooked, however, is
that. judges can make mistakes in granting
motions to suppress evidence-mistakes that can
block justice and free criminals To hold that
the Government cannot raise its voice in protest
when obvious errors are made would be to give
criminals an unfair and dangerous advantage
over the Government Congress should re-
inforce the appellate majority's ruling with
legislation that will leave no doubt as to the
right of the Government to appeal in such cases
as the CefaratM prosecution.