Court Opinion

ID: 9686575
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 15:56:24.245068+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:20.433459
License: Public Domain

Edwards, J.
(concurring in result). I concur with Justice Voelker’s result. It is obvious that at the time of the search of the automobile in this case, and at the trial of this case, the police officers were relying upon People v. Davis, 247 Mich 536, as authorizing search of the automobile contemporaneous with any traffic arrest. As a result, little effort was made in court to offer justification for the search in terms of probable cause to believe a felony was being committed.
In People v. Gonzales, 356 Mich 247, 256, we have recently overruled People v. Davis. But as Mr. Justice Voelker points out, Gonzales also stands as *558authority for admission in evidence (under the 1936 and 1952 amendments to article 2, § 10, Mich Const [1908]) of the revolver, the dynamite, and the dynamite caps which were found in the trunk of defendant’s car. With these items in evidence and without the other exhibits, this record offers ample evidence to sustain the convictions. I agree that there was no prejudicial error.
Dethmers, C. J., and Carr, and Kavanagh, JJ., concurred with Edwards, J.