Delly v. State

Mason, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant, James Alphonzo Delly, was convicted at a ³⁹² bench trial in the Criminal Court of Baltimore of the crime of possession of heroin with intent to distribute. He was sentenced to a term of seven years. The appellant’s only assignment of error is that the evidence was obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure carried out under an illegal general warrant.

On August 31, 1974, police officers armed with a search warrant entered the premises of 831 Whitelock Street in Baltimore City. In looking for the appellant, the officers broke into two unoccupied rooms on the second floor of the building prior to breaking into the third room where the appellant and sixty-five bags of heroin were found. After locating the appellant, the officers also broke into two unoccupied rooms on the third floor. Nothing was seized or introduced into evidence against the appellant from these unoccupied rooms.

It was established at trial that 831 Whitelock Street was a multiple family dwelling and that the owner had authority to rent four rooms, including the one that was rented to the appellant. The principal thrust of the appellant's argument is that since the premises were a multiple family dwelling, the search and seizure were illegal “because the warrant did not describe the place to be searched with that particularity, required by the Fourth Amendment”. The appellant further argues that before obtaining or executing the warrant, the police had a duty to check with the proper authorities to determine whether the house was a single or multiple family dwelling. To support this novel proposition, the appellant relies solely on the case of United States v. Santore, 290 F. 2d 51 (2d Cir. 1960) cert. denied, 365 U. S. 834 (1961).

In that case, a warrant was issued authorizing the search of a house which appeared from the outside to be a single family dwelling. In executing the warrant, however, it was discovered that the house contained two or more separate family units. In upholding the validity of the warrant, the Court made the following observations: The house at 164 Hill Street is to all outward appearances a one-family house with a front door and a side door, and it had always been registered ³⁹³ with the local authorities as a one-family dwelling. A few years prior to the search the interior of the house was renovated and subdivided by Orlando, but, in contravention of local ordinances, no permission to do so was