History
  • No items yet
midpage
Marsh v. State
185 Tenn. 103
Tenn.
1947
Check Treatment

This is an appeal from conviction of unlawful possession of whiskey and fine of $100 for the offense. The determinative question presented is the validity of the search warrant by which the only evidence was obtained which supports the conviction. The warrant was issued not by a Judicial officer, but by the Clerk of the General Sessions Court of Giles County under authority assumed under the following provision of the Act of the Legislature creating that Court, that the Clerk of the Court ". . . shall have concurrent authority with the Judge to issue warrants and other processes and writs, other than those which the law required shall be issued only by a Judicial officer." Sec. 17, Chapter 186, Private Acts 1943.

It has long been established as the law of this State that the issuance of a search warrant is a judicial function. Elliott v.State, 148 Tenn. 414, 416, 256 S.W. 431; Craven v. State,148 Tenn. 517, 519, 256 S.W. 431; Jackson v. State, 153 Tenn. 431, 440, 284 S.W. 356; Gallimore v. State, 173 Tenn. 178, 182, 116 S.W.2d 1001; Lea et ux v. State, 181 Tenn. 378, 381, 181 S.W.2d 351.

Clearly, therefore, authority vested in the Clerk to issue warrants under section 17 of the Act of 1943, supra, did not include the issuance of search warrants, and that function was excluded by the language (such warrants as) "shall be issued only by a Judicial officer."

We, therefore, accept the recommendation of the Attorney General and the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

All concur. *Page 105

Case Details

Case Name: Marsh v. State
Court Name: Tennessee Supreme Court
Date Published: Jun 26, 1947
Citation: 185 Tenn. 103
Court Abbreviation: Tenn.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.