Document: 429 U.S. 20 97 S.Ct. 29 50 L.Ed.2d 25 John David MOORE, Jr.v.UNITED STATES. No. 75-1692. Oct. 18, 1976. PER CURIAM. 1 Moore, Jr., was convicted in a bench trial of possession heroin with intent to distribute it, violation 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). In an unpublished order, the Court Appeals summarily affirmed judgment conviction. 2 early January 1975, police officers received tip from informant that Moore and others were at "Moore's apartment." The obtained search warrant entered apartment, where they found lying face down near coffee table living room. Also present apartment woman who sitting on couch same Bags containing both top beneath table, seized along various narcotics paraphernalia. 3 (1) At consolidated hearing Moore's motion suppress evidence merits, prosecution adduced no admissible showing which he other than his proximity time executed. Indeed, one officer testified did not find "any indications ownership closing argument however, prosecutor placed substantial emphasis out-of-court declaration unidentified informant: 4 "(A) confidential came Detective Uribe said, 'I have information or I through personal observation, know resides certain here El Paso, Texas, is amount heroin.' " 5 adjudging guilty, court had been close heroin, tenant question, had, therefore, contraband. making these findings, expressly relied hearsay 6 "Information revealed by upon preparation Affidavit disclosed occupant Apartment # 60, Building 7, Hill Country Apartments, 213 Argonaut, Texas." 7 Defense counsel objected court's reliance evidence, but judge refused amend this finding except add phrase "at seizure" end sentence. 8 There can be doubt informant's question apartment," either as related affidavit reiterated live testimony officers, thus inadmissible issue guilt. Introduction deprived opportunity cross-examine exactly what meant factual basis, if any, there for believing regular resident there. similarly chance show witness' recollection erroneous credible.1 falls within exception rule recognized Federal Rules Evidence, statement determining petitioner's guilt innocence error.2 9 Although only competent them another person also shown even resident, Solicitor General now argues error admitting harmless. That far clear. Whether alone, when viewed light most favorable prosecution, could suffice prove beyond reasonable fact guilty alone. 10 (2) Government suggests failure testify adduce any "that presence unrelated heroin" highlights alleged harmlessness error, suggestion carry weight view elementary proposition bore burden proving every element charged offense. Equally unpersuasive Government's probably harmless because trial; whatever merits general proposition, it has hollow ring case defendant guilty. 11 petition writ certiorari granted, vacated, remanded so may determine whether wrongful admission error.3 12 It ordered. 13 THE CHIEF JUSTICE, Mr. Justice BLACKMUN, REHNQUIST, dissent summary reversal would set oral argument. moved require disclosure identity, opposed denied it. we do rely confession note concedes improper. urges suggest consideration restricted suppression constituted waiver objection District Judge's innocence. passed leave resolution remand.

Category: 0