Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

appealfelony
statuteappealcriminal procedure

Related Cases

Boggs v. State, 928 N.E.2d 855
View Case »
United States v. Flores-Lopez, Not Reported in Fed. Supp., 2020 WL 1862599
View Case »
People v. Casassa, 49 N.Y.2d 668, 404 N.E.2d 1310, 427 N.Y.S.2d 769
View Case »
U.S. v. Hellbusch, 147 F.3d 782
View Case »
People v. Brackett, 117 Ill.2d 170, 510 N.E.2d 877, 109 Ill.Dec. 809
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

U.S. v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 68 S.Ct. 222, 92 L.Ed. 210

Facts

Michael Di Re was arrested without a warrant after being found in a car with two other individuals, one of whom was in possession of counterfeit gasoline ration coupons. Following his arrest, Di Re was searched, and additional counterfeit coupons were discovered on his person. The legality of the search and arrest was challenged, leading to the appeal.

An investigator of the Office of Price Administration was informed by one Reed that he was to buy counterfeit gasoline ration coupons from a certain Buttitta at a named place in the City of Buffalo, New York. The investigator and a detective from the Buffalo Police Department trailed Buttitta's car and finally came upon it parked at the appointed place.

Issue

Was the search and arrest of Michael Di Re lawful, and could the evidence obtained from it be admitted in court?

The Government was granted certiorari, raising no question other than the correctness of the holding by the Court of Appeals that the evidence was the fruit of an illegal arrest and search.

Rule

An arrest without a warrant must comply with state law, and evidence obtained from an unlawful search and arrest is inadmissible in court.

We believe, however, that in absence of an applicable federal statute the law of the state where an arrest without warrant takes place determines its validity.

Analysis

The court determined that the arrest of Di Re was invalid under New York law, as the arresting officer did not inform him of the cause of the arrest, and there was insufficient evidence to justify the arrest for a felony. The search that followed was deemed unlawful, and thus the evidence obtained could not be used against Di Re.

The court below assumed that the arresting officer, a state officer, derived his authority to arrest Buttitta and Reed, although it was for a federal crime, from s 177 of the New York Code of Criminal Procedure, and also considered the legality of the arrest of Di Re under paragraph 3 thereof.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals, concluding that the evidence obtained from the illegal search and arrest could not support Di Re's conviction.

Taking the law as it has been given to us, this arrest and search were beyond the lawful authority of those who executed them. The conviction based on evidence so obtained cannot stand.

Who won?

Michael Di Re prevailed in the case because the Supreme Court upheld the lower court's ruling that the search and arrest were unlawful, rendering the evidence inadmissible.

Michael Di Re was convicted on a charge of knowingly possessing counterfeit gasoline ration coupons in violation of the Second War Powers Act of 1942, s 301, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, s 633.

You must be