“The fingerprints are used as a means of insuring that the person on trial is the same one to whom the packet refers.”
How later courts described this case
- “The fingerprints are used as a means of insuring that the person on trial is the same one to whom the packet refers.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ONION, Presiding Judge
(dissenting).
I agree that the shotgun and shell, being the fruit of an illegal search and seizure, were inadmissible. I cannot agree that the constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt under the test established by Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). See, also, Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250 , 89 S.Ct. 1726 , 23 L.Ed.2d 284 (1969).
Therefore, I respectfully dissent.