Document: 397 U.S. 72 90 S.Ct. 774 25 L.Ed.2d 60 The COLONNADE CATERING CORP., Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 108. Argued Jan. 15, 1970. Decided Feb. 25, O. John Rogge, New York City, for petitioner. Jerome Feit, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner, a licensee in authorized to serve alcoholic beverages and also holder federal retail liquor dealer's occupational stamp tax, 26 U.S.C. § 5121(a), brought this suit obtain return seized suppress it as evidence. District Court granted relief. Appeals reversed. 410 F.2d 197. case is here on petition writ certiorari which we granted, 396 814, 58, 24 66, review decision light Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 523, 87 1727, 18 930, See City Seattle, 541, 1741, 943. 2 Petitioner runs catering establishment. A agent, member Alcohol Tobacco Tax Division Internal Revenue Service, was guest at party petitioner's premises noted possible violation Federal excise tax law. When agents later visited place, another progress. They noticed that being served. Without manager's consent, they inspected cellar. Then asked manager open locked storeroom. He said only person room one Rozzo, president, who not premises. Later Rozzo arrived refused if had search warrant answered did need one. continued refuse unlock room, an agent broke lock entered. removed bottles now controversy apparently suspected refilled contrary command 5301(c). 3 It provided 5146(b)1 76062 Secretary Treasury or his delegate has broad authority enter inspect dealers liquors.3 And refusal dealer permit inspection, 7342: 4 'Any owner any building having agency superintendence same, refuses admit officer employee Department acting under section 7606 (relating entry examination taxable articles) him examine such article articles, shall, every refusal, forfeit $500.' 5 question whether imposition fine entry—with attendant consequences inspection laws may have closely regulated industry—is statutory scheme exclusive sanction, absent break enter. 6 In Frank Maryland, 359 360, 366—367, 79 804, 809, 877, involving municipal code, said: 7 '(The) inspector no power force attempt it. imposed resistance, but officials are past unwilling occupant.' 8 Maryland overruled supra, insofar permitted warrantless searches inspections fire, health, housing codes. dictum provision allow made use improper when there disturbed; contains controlling principle4 case. 9 Government, emphasizing Fourth Amendment bans 'unreasonable seizures,'5 relies heavily long history regulation industry during pre-Fourth days, first England American Colonies. pointed out, example, 1660 precursor modern-day legislation enacted England6 allowed commissioners enter, demand, brewing houses all times inspection. Massachusetts similar law 1692.7 1791, year ratified, Congress imported distilled spirits here,8 officers powers distilling importer9 without warrant. From these regulations governing industry, argued been most solicitous protecting revenue against various types fraud end repeatedly make seizures articles laws. 10 recognized special treatment kind Boyd United States, 116 616, 624, 524, 529, 29 L.Ed. 746: 11 '(In) excisable dutiable government interest them payment duties thereon, until paid right keep observation, pursue drag from concealment.' added: 12 'The seizure stolen goods by common law; forfeited breach laws, concealed avoid payable them, English statutes least two centuries past; like our own acts commencement government. statute passed congress regulate collection duties, act July 31, 1789, Stat. 29, 43, provisions effect. As same proposed adoption original amendments constitution, clear members body regard 'unreasonable,' embraced within prohibition amendment.' Id., 623, 528. 13 We agree design deems necessary meet evils hand. general rule laid down 545, 1740—'that administrative entry, upon portions commercial public becompelled through prosecution physical framework procedure'—is therefore applicable here. See, reserved problems 'licensing programs' requiring saying can be resolved 'on case-by-case basis standard reasonableness.' 546, S.Ct., 1741. 14 Where rules procedure inspectors must follow, its restrictive apply. case: 15 businessman, occupant residence, constitutional go about business free unreasonable official entries private property. too, placed jeopardy regulatory enforced field evidenced warrant.' 543, 1739. 16 What reflects Nation's traditions strongly opposed using definite doors. deal with subject close supervision respects branches including retailers, fashion standards reasonableness seizures. Under existing statutes, selected does include forcible issue, authorizing forcible, entries, making offense admission inspector. 17 Reversed. Chief BURGER, whom BLACK STEWART join, dissenting. 19 I join dissenting BLACK; however, since my position goes somewhat beyond discussion add views separately. 20 assume could held valid, contraband discovered forfeiture, unless (a) 'unreasonable' Constitution (b) prohibited imposing restraints apart those Constitution. majority sees violation; agree. 21 set out notes affirmatively define conditions inspect. 5146(b) 'any spirits, wines, beer kept stored premises.' time done fixed 'during hours.' Section U.S.C., forth note opinion, provides where kept, 'so far purpose examining objects.' 22 needed neither nor secure place establishment seeks sell services public. rely carry their duty after accomplishing entry. This implicitly limiting 'business hours' daytime. went mere entry; Inspection authorization would meaningless lockers, cabinets, closets, storerooms indeed pry cases see contents. 23 Surely unaware purveyors do leave wares stores reserve supplies lying casually about; ways, storerooms; practice so universal judicially noticed. Here acted explicitly containing language necessary'; simple me plainly enough 'kept * premises' storerooms. prescribed reasonable means enforcing collection, court say cannot done. That added penalty access irrelevant. encourage licensed comply promptly facilitate inspections. $500 Government's remedy non-cooperation taxpayer. hardly naive give option choose between risk certain discovery, he violation, large store forfeiture. At current prices represent four five spirits. alternative securing touches issues on. should note, course, holding eliminates forfeiture leaves Government lawsuit collect fine. With deference submit needlessly complicated relatively issue construction undertones constitutionally limited searches. words necessary' quite plain dimensions presented. 27 BLACK, CHIEF JUSTICE 28 proceedings Rules Criminal Procedure agents. One '(a) aggrieved unlawful move district property obtained ground (1) illegally *.' Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 41(e). (Emphasis added.) read provision, requires petitioner show illegal, either because violated Amendment, some Congress. requirement met entitled liquor. There doubt places historically subjected strict governmental scrutiny many both country England. sets little opinion. nothing unreasonable, term used permitting into public, finding something indicates flagrant actually occurring. just case, reason earth why man hold conduct unreasonable. certainly prevent faithful officers, practically before very eyes, taking steps stop prove violation. 30 majority, illegal holds §§ 5146(b), 7606(a),1 returned. While express terms authorize breaking entering seize inviolation law, perfectly declare impliedly exactly type involved am confident further fines search,2 intended became necessary. think speak more clearly than already has. Since conclude Act Congress, carried pursuant congressional authorization, affirm judgment below provides: hours (including storage) inspecting records other documents required chapter issued thereto Entry day. daytime, objects made, produced, objects. '(b) night. 'When night, while open, performance duties.' defined 5122(a). States Frisch, 140 660, 662. reads follows: people persons, houses, papers, effects, seizures, shall violated, Warrants probable cause, supported Oath affirmation, particularly describing searched, persons things seized.' Car. 2, c. 23, 19. June 24, 1692, Mass. Acts Resolves, Vol. 1, 1692—1714, p. 33, 5, 8. March 3, 199. 206, provided: 'That lawful each survey request, store-houses, ware-houses, buildings (registered) manner aforesaid, tasting, gauging otherwise, take account quantity, kinds proofs therein contained; samples thereof, paying usual price.' Set ante, 73 nn. 2. 7342, 74.

Category: 0