No. 25520 Precedential Affirmed Processed

State v. Mims

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed December 29, 1922 · 95 So. 264

Cited by

State v. Mastricovo 59 So. 2d 403 La. 1952
State v. Robinson 58 So. 2d 408 La. 1952
State v. Shotts 22 So. 2d 209 La. 1945
State v. Shotts 22 So. 2d 209 La. 1945
State v. Alvarez 162 So. 725 La. 1935
State v. Norris 109 So. 787 La. 1926
State v. Eddins 108 So. 468 La. 1926
State v. Davis 97 So. 590 La. 1923

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

City of Shreveport v. Marx 148 La. 31
152 La. 337 not in our corpus

Opinion text

By the WHOLE COURT. ST. PAUL, J. Defendant was convicted of unlawfully manufacturing whisky for sale for beverage purposes, and was fined $500 and 60 days in jail, and 12 months additional if the fine be not paid. He appeals to this court. The record contains but one bill of exception, to wit, to a refusal of the district judge to exclude certain evidence obtained by search and seizure made without a search warrant. The bill is without merit. In Shreveport v. Marx, 148 La. 31 , 86 South. 602 , and again in State v. Fleckinger, 152 La. 337 , 93 South. 115 , this court held that evidence otherwise admissible in a criminal case, should not be excluded even though obtained by search and seizure without a search warrant. Decree. The judgment appealed from is therefore affirmed. 1 O’NIELL, J., concurs in the decree, but does not approve the doctrine of State v. Fleckinger.