In People v. Dorrington, 221 Mich. 571, 191 N.W. 831, relied on by the plaintiff in error, a conviction of unlawful possession of burglars' tools was reversed on the ground that there was no showing of unlawful intent.
Summary of this case from Smith v. CommonwealthDecided April 11, 2001.
Appeal from the Wayne County Ct., 2/6/01.
Applications in criminal cases for leave to appeal denied.
In People v. Dorrington, 221 Mich. 571, 191 N.W. 831, relied on by the plaintiff in error, a conviction of unlawful possession of burglars' tools was reversed on the ground that there was no showing of unlawful intent.
Summary of this case from Smith v. CommonwealthIn Dorrington, the Michigan Supreme Court concluded that the defendant's house keys, alarm clock with battery, and knitting needles were not burglary tools, because there was no evidence that the defendant intended to use them in a burglary and that because of the items' common household nature they could not be presumed to be used for the purpose of breaking and entering.
Summary of this case from People v. LakeIn Dorrington, the Court found that the defendant's household keys, an alarm clock with battery, and knitting needles were not burglary tools not because they were common household items, but because there was no evidence that the defendant intended to use them in a burglary and their common household nature did not mean that they could be presumed to be used for the purpose of a burglary.
Summary of this case from People v. SullivanFull title:PEOPLE v. DORRINGTON
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Apr 11, 2001
If arrested, the arrest was unlawful: "a search (of the person) is justifiable only as an incident to a…
State v. FahnFor statements of these cases, see the opinion of Chief Justice Taft in Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S.…