Per Curiam.
Petitioner's first contention is that his conviction was void because he was subjected to an illegal search and seizure. According to petitioner's testimony, a man came into the bar in which he was employed and sold him the tires in question. Subsequently, the police came to the bar and asked him whether he had purchased some tires. When he indicated that he had and had shown them to the police, they told him to take them off the car and put them...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
