
    STATE ex rel. GREEN, Respondent, v. WRIGHT, Appellant.
    (No. 4,463.)
    (Submitted September 21, 1921.
    Decided October 10, 1921.)
    [201 Pac. 316.]
    
      Intoxicating Liquors — Wrongful Seizure — Void Search-warrant —New Trial Unauthorized.
    
    Intoxicating Liquors — Wrongful Seizure — Void Search-warrant — Beturn of Liquors.
    1. Judgment declaring a quantity of whiskey seized undeT a void search-warrant forfeited and ordering it destroyed, reversed upon authority of Samlin v. District Court, 59 Mont. 600, 198 Pae. 362, with directions to the trial court to dismiss the proceeding instituted under the Prohibition Enforcement Act (Chap. 143, Laws 1917), and order the sheriff to return to the claimant the articles seized.
    Same — New Trial — Motion Unauthorized.
    2. In a search-warrant proceeding instituted under the provisions of the Prohibition Enforcement Act, a motion for a new trial is unauthorized.
    
      Appeals from District Court, Missoula County; B. Lee Mc-Culloch, Judge.
    
    Search-warrant proceeding instituted by the state on the relation of J. T. Green against M. F’. Wright. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals from the judgment on an order denying him a new trial.
    Appeal from order dismissed. Judgment reversed.
    
      Mr. Harry H. Parsons and Mr. Thomas N. Marlowe, for Appellants, submitted a brief; Mr. Marlowe argued the cause orally.
    
      Mr. S. C. Ford, Attorney General, Mr. Frank Woody and Mr. Carl E. Cameron, Assistant Attorneys General, submitted a brief; Mr. L. A. Foot, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause orally.
   Opinion:

PER CURIAM.

This case is a search-warrant preceeding, instituted in the district court of Missoula county under the provisions of the Prohibition Enforcement Act (Laws 1917, Chap. 143). It came before this court on appeal by defendant and claimant from the final judgment rendered by the court after a hearing upon the return by the sheriff of the warrant declaring forfeited a quantity of whiskey seized thereunder and ordering it destroyed, and an attempted appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial.

The appeal from the order denying the motion is dismissed, for the reason that a motion for a new trial in such proceedings is not authorized. The appeal from the judgment presents the same question as that presented in the cases of State ex rel. Samlin v. District Court of Custer County, 59 Mont. 600, 198 Pac. 362, and State ex rel. Hogue v. O'Brien, 60 Mont. 178, 198 Pac. 1117. Upon the authority of these cases, the judgment is reversed, and the district court is directed to dismiss the proceeding and order the sheriff to return the whiskey and articles seized to the defendant and claimant.

Reversed.  