Court Opinion

ID: 9459019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 21:08:03.367213+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:58.961153
License: Public Domain

KNOCH, Senior Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
The trial judge who saw and heard the witnesses credited their testimony that the local police officers did believe that all Chicago policemen carried sidearms. Granted this belief, it was only reasonable to look for the apparently missing sidearm. It would be unreasonable to rely on information from the petitioner whose state had so impressed them that they sought a sobriety test for him. The original cursory cheek of the glove compartment and back seat was hardly sufficient. It would be careless to leave a firearm in the trunk of an automobile in a public garage, even in the small town of Eewaskum where the majority believes there was little chance of anyone’s improperly getting possession of the automobile. If the firearm had been there, had been improperly secured by some unauthorized person and used to injure a citizen, then the police would have been remiss in their performance of duty and morally responsible for whatever happened as a *287result. Despite the concession of the respondent, I find more persuasive the conclusion of the majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court that this check of the automobile was not a search, but an inspection. I would affirm the conviction.