California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Carella, 12 Cal.Rptr. 446, 191 Cal.App.2d 115 (Cal. App. 1961):
The defendants rely upon the decision in People v. Mills, 148 Cal.App.2d 392, 402, 306 P.2d 1005 in support of their position. However, the situation in that case is clearly distinguishable from the one at bar. In the cited case the defendant was arrested for one offense; incident to this arrest a search was made; the search uncovered evidence in proof [191 Cal.App.2d 133] of the offense for which the defendant was arrested and also in proof of 12 other offenses; in this regard it was an exploratory search; and the court held that the evidence obtained by the search in support of the one offense was admissible but the evidence in support of the 12 other offenses was not admissible. In the case at bar the only evidence obtained through the search which was admitted was evidence in proof of the offense for which the defendants were arrested. The ruling in the Mills case (People v. Mills, supra, 148 Cal.App.2d 392, 306 P.2d 1005) does not foreclose the admission of
Page 457
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.