267 U.S. 498 (1925)
Steele appealed directly to the Supreme Court from a judgment of the District Court. The judgment denied his petition to vacate a search warrant. By authority of the warrant, Steele’s premises were searched and a large amount of whiskey and other intoxicating liquor was found and seized.1
The building searched was a four-story building in New York City on the south side of West 46th Street. It bore a sign reading “Indian Head Auto Truck Service — Indian Head Storage Warehouse, No. 609 and 611.” The entire building was under lease to Steele. It was entered by three entrances from the street, including an automobile entrance into a garage. An elevator reached to the four stories and was of sufficient size to take up a Ford machine.2
There is no partition between 611 and 609 on the ground or garage floor. There were only partial partitions above.3
On December 6, 1922, at about 10 o’clock A. M., Isidor Einstein, a General Prohibition Agent, accompanied by Agent Moe W. Smith, stood in front of the garage at 611 West 46th Street. They saw a small truck driven into the entrance of the garage. The driver unloaded several cases stencilled whiskey.4 Einstein left his companion to remain in the neighborhood until he could get the warrant. In somewhat more than an hour he returned with it and made the seizure.5 The prohibition agents seized 150 cases of whiskey, 92 bags of whiskey, and one 5-gallon can of alcohol on the third floor on the 609 side. They also seized additional quantities of gin, whiskey, and barrels on the second floor on both sides of the building.6
The affidavit for the search warrant was sworn by Isidor Einstein before U. S. Commissioner Saml. M. Hitchcock on December 6, 1922. The search warrant issued by the Commissioner followed the affidavit in the description of the place and property to be searched and seized. It was directed to Einstein as General Prohibition Agent.7 The facts developed before the Commissioner on hearing this petition for return of the seized goods were these. Einstein and Moe Smith were prohibition agents. They saw a truck depositing cases in a garage on the opposite side of 46th Street from where they were. Einstein crossed the street and saw they were cases stenciled as whiskey. A search of the records of the Federal Prohibition Director’s office failed to disclose any permit for the manufacture, sale or possession of intoxicating liquors at the premises.8
Whether the search warrant was issued upon probable cause supported by affidavit?9
Under the Fourth Amendment and Title XI of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917, as made applicable by Section 25, Title II, of the National Prohibition Act, a search warrant can be issued only upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, particularly describing the property and place to be searched.10 The affidavits must set forth the facts tending to establish the grounds of the application or probable cause for believing that they exist.11 If the judge or commissioner is satisfied of the existence of the grounds for the application, or that there is probable cause to believe their existence, he must issue a search warrant.12
Yes. The affidavit for the search warrant sworn by Isidor Einstein before U. S. Commissioner Saml. M. Hitchcock on December 6, 1922, recounted that Einstein and Moe W. Smith observed a small truck driven into the entrance of the garage at 611 West 46th Street and the driver unload several cases stencilled whiskey.13 Einstein further stated that a search of the records of the Federal Prohibition Director’s office failed to disclose any permit for the manufacture, sale or possession of intoxicating liquors at the premises.14
These facts and circumstances were such as to warrant a man of prudence and caution in believing that the offense of possessing illegally whiskey and intoxicating liquor had been committed in the building described.15 The Commissioner, being satisfied, issued the search warrant directed to Einstein as General Prohibition Agent.16
The search warrant was issued upon probable cause supported by affidavit.17
Whether the search warrant particularly described the place to be searched?18
Yes. The search warrant described the place as the garage located in the building at 611 West 46th Street, Borough of Manhattan, City and Southern District of New York, this building is used for business purposes only, and any building or rooms connected or used in connection with said garage, the basement or sub-cellar beneath the same.21 This description clearly indicated the whole four-story building on the south side of West 46th Street with the sign on it Indian Head Auto Truck Service — Indian Head Storage Warehouse, No. 609 and 611, all under lease to Steele.22 There is no partition between 611 and 609 on the ground or garage floor, and there were only partial partitions above, and the elevator reaching to the four stories allowed the officer to ascertain and identify the entire building as the place intended to be searched.23
The search warrant particularly described the place to be searched.24
Whether the search warrant particularly described the property to be seized?25
Yes. The warrant described the property to be seized as cases of whiskey.28 While there is no evidence specifically identifying the particular cases which were seized as those which Einstein saw, the description as cases of whiskey is quite specific enough when applied to the 150 cases of whiskey, 92 bags of whiskey, and one 5-gallon can of alcohol seized on the third floor on the 609 side, along with 33 cases of gin on the 609 side of the second floor, and six 5-gallon jugs of whiskey, 33 cases of gin, 102 quarts of whiskey, and two 50-gallon barrels of whiskey, and a corking machine, taken on the 611 side of the building.29
The search warrant particularly described the property to be seized.30
Whether the search conducted under the warrant was unreasonable?31
Under that Title, in conformity with the Fourth Amendment, the warrant can be issued only upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, particularly describing the property and place to be searched.32
Yes. The search did not go too far.33 The warrant was applied for to search any building or rooms connected or used in connection with the garage, or the basement or sub-cellar beneath the same.34 It is quite evident that the elevator of the garage connected it with every floor and room in the building and was intended to be used with it.35
The attempt to give the building the character of a dwelling house by reason of the fact that an employee slept and cooked in a room on one of the floors was of course futile, as the room occupied in this case was not a private dwelling within these descriptions, and more than this, it was not searched and no liquor was found in it.36 The places searched and in which the liquor was found were all rooms connected with the garage by the elevator. One of them was a room on the second floor with a door open toward the elevator in which three men were bottling and corking whiskey.37
The search conducted under the warrant was not unreasonable.38