TURK v. STATE

Full title: TURK v. STATE OF INDIANA

Court: Court of Appeals of Indiana

Date published: Mar 27, 1929

89 Ind. App. 30 (Ind. Ct. App. 1929)

165 N.E. 558

Opinion

No. 13,613.

Filed March 27, 1929.

SEARCHES AND SEIZURES — Issuance of Search Warrant — Testimony Heard by Issuing Judge — Probable Cause Shown — Affidavit on Information and Belief. — Where evidence was heard before the judge who issued a search warrant, and the police officer who made the affidavit on which the warrant issued testified that a certain person had told the witness that he had seen whisky sold in defendant's place of business, probable cause for issuing the warrant was shown, although the affidavit was made on information and belief, and a motion to suppress the evidence obtained by such search was properly overruled.

From Marion Criminal Court (60,060); James A. Collins, Judge.

Frank Turk was convicted of a criminal offense, and he appealed. Affirmed. By the court in banc.

Frank A. Symmes, Garth B. Melson, Donald F. Lafuze and Earl R. Cox, for appellant.

Arthur L. Gilliom, Attorney-General, and Edward J. Lennon, Jr., Deputy Attorney-General, for the State.

ENLOE, C.J.

The only questions presented on this appeal relate to the action of the court in overruling a motion by counsel for the appellant to quash the affidavit for search warrant, to quash the search warrant and to suppress all evidence and testimony incident to said search under said warrant.

There was a hearing upon said motion and the officer who signed the affidavit for said warrant testified that, at the time he made said affidavit, he was sworn by one of the judges of the municipal court of Indianapolis; that, under oath, he then and there informed the said judge that a certain person had told him, the officer, that he, the informant, had seen whisky sold in the place of the appellant, 969 Holmes avenue, Indianapolis; that he made the affidavit for the search warrant upon information and belief, and that the court issued the warrant after hearing his said information. This testimony disclosed probable cause for the issuing of said warrant and the court did not err in the rulings of which complaint is made. Wallace v. State (1927), 199 Ind. 317, 157 N.E. 657.

Affirmed.