. "4361"^^ . . . . "354"^^ . "1073056739"^^ . "unanimous"@en . . . . . "64462191"^^ . . . "--04-04"^^ . . . . . . . . . . "Carroll v. United States,"@en . . "1957"^^ . . "1957"^^ . "Warren"@en . "The order of suppression of evidence in this case by the District Court is not appealable under the statutes of the federal appeals courts; therefore, the appeal should've been dismissed."@en . . . "Carroll v. United States"@en . . "394"^^ . . . . . "17280.0"^^ . . "172800.0"^^ . . "--06-24"^^ . . . "Leon F. Carroll and Daniel J. Stewart v. United States"@en . "Carroll v. United States, 354 U.S. 394 (1957), was a case dealing with the appealablility of a suppression order issued by the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia for an unlawful warrant under the Fourth Amendment. In a unanimous 9-0 opinion written by Justice Warren, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the Court of Appeals, stating that: The Court held that, although some orders may be appealable under the authority of 18 U.S.C. 1291, this order in this case lacked such authority. The Circuit Court was reversed and remanded."@en . . . "Leon F. Carroll and Daniel J. Stewart v. United States"@en . "Carroll v. United States (1957)"@en . "Carroll v. United States, 354 U.S. 394 (1957), was a case dealing with the appealablility of a suppression order issued by the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia for an unlawful warrant under the Fourth Amendment. In February of 1957, officers arrested Carroll and Stewart on John Doe arrest warrants for violations of local lottery laws. During the detainment, officers conducted a Search Incident to Arrest and seized evidence from their person. They petitioned the District Court for suppression of the evidence on grounds that the warrants were null and void due to the lack of the Constitutionally required probable cause under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The District Court granted the petition. The Government appeals to the Federal Court of Appeals, which reversed the suppression order. In a unanimous 9-0 opinion written by Justice Warren, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the Court of Appeals, stating that: \U0001D43C\U0001D461 \U0001D456\U0001D460 \U0001D44E\U0001D465\U0001D456\U0001D45C\U0001D45A\U0001D44E\U0001D461\U0001D456\U0001D450, \U0001D44E\U0001D460 \U0001D44E \U0001D45A\U0001D44E\U0001D461\U0001D461\U0001D452\U0001D45F \U0001D45C\U0001D453 \u210E\U0001D456\U0001D460\U0001D461\U0001D45C\U0001D45F\U0001D466 \U0001D44E\U0001D460 \U0001D464\U0001D452\U0001D459\U0001D459 \U0001D44E\U0001D460 \U0001D451\U0001D45C\U0001D450\U0001D461\U0001D45F\U0001D456\U0001D45B\U0001D452, \U0001D461\u210E\U0001D44E\U0001D461 \U0001D461\u210E\U0001D452 \U0001D452\U0001D465\U0001D456\U0001D460\U0001D461\U0001D452\U0001D45B\U0001D450\U0001D452 \U0001D45C\U0001D453 \U0001D44E\U0001D45D\U0001D45D\U0001D452\U0001D459\U0001D459\U0001D44E\U0001D461\U0001D452 \U0001D457\U0001D462\U0001D45F\U0001D456\U0001D460\U0001D451\U0001D456\U0001D450\U0001D461\U0001D456\U0001D45C\U0001D45B \U0001D456\U0001D45B \U0001D44E \U0001D460\U0001D45D\U0001D452\U0001D450\U0001D456\U0001D453\U0001D456\U0001D450 \U0001D453\U0001D452\U0001D451\U0001D452\U0001D45F\U0001D44E\U0001D459 \U0001D450\U0001D45C\U0001D462\U0001D45F\U0001D461 \U0001D45C\U0001D463\U0001D452\U0001D45F \U0001D44E \U0001D454\U0001D456\U0001D463\U0001D452\U0001D45B \U0001D461\U0001D466\U0001D45D\U0001D452 \U0001D45C\U0001D453 \U0001D450\U0001D44E\U0001D460\U0001D452 \U0001D456\U0001D460 \U0001D451\U0001D452\U0001D45D\U0001D452\U0001D45B\U0001D451\U0001D452\U0001D45B\U0001D461 \U0001D462\U0001D45D\U0001D45C\U0001D45B \U0001D44E\U0001D462\U0001D461\u210E\U0001D45C\U0001D45F\U0001D456\U0001D461\U0001D466 \U0001D452\U0001D465\U0001D45D\U0001D45F\U0001D452\U0001D460\U0001D460\U0001D459\U0001D466 \U0001D450\U0001D45C\U0001D45B\U0001D453\U0001D452\U0001D45F\U0001D45F\U0001D452\U0001D451 \U0001D44F\U0001D466 \U0001D460\U0001D461\U0001D44E\U0001D461\U0001D462\U0001D461\U0001D452. The Court held that, although some orders may be appealable under the authority of 18 U.S.C. 1291, this order in this case lacked such authority. The Circuit Court was reversed and remanded."@en . . . . . . . .