Document: 371 U.S. 392 83 S.Ct. 385 9 L.Ed.2d 390 Michael CLEARY, Petitioner,v.Edward BOLGER. No. 57. Argued Nov. 14 and 15, 1962. Decided Jan. 14, 1963. Irving Malchman, New York City, for petitioner. Joseph Aronstein, respondent. Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This case draws in question propriety issuance a federal injunction restraining petitioner, state officer, from giving evidence pending criminal prosecution administrative proceeding. 2 The facts, as found by two lower courts, are follows. About 8:30 one Saturday morning September 1959 Customs officers observed respondent, hiring agent longshoreman licensed Waterfront Commission Harbor, enter deserted pier, carry out cardboard carton, place it car parked at pier entrance. officers, who were concerned about recent frequency thefts, particularly liquor, waterfront area, followed respondent's short distance then ordered him to stop. A search automobile revealed that carton contained only empty soda bottles, but glove compartment number spark plugs windshield wipers, some which stamped 'Made England.' Respondent was asked whether he had obtained any liquor piers, admitted six or eight bottles home purchased members ships' crews turn, said, bought them stores. 3 agents took respondent into custody; brought office, denied permission use telephone, questioned until shortly before 11 a.m. During this period signed document consenting his told consent form unnecessary since they already enough information warrant might well sign save trouble. He first refused such without consulting lawyer. drove Jersey and, warrant, gave thorough search, uncovered 75 Stenorette tape recording machine made West Germany, various other items apparent foreign origin, perfumes, linens, costume jewelry, etc. These articles, thought have been illegally acquired, back headquarters York, where, starting 4 p.m., again questioned. By time Commission, bi-state agency Jersey1 worked close cooperation with Service matters law enforcement on waterfront, informed arrest, detectives present when interrogation resumed. Petitioner Cleary these detectives. After maintained tool room basement an apartment house petitioner officer accompanied room, nothing suspicious discovered returned 5:45 p.m. 5 did not make statement, sworn interrogated presence reporter, recorded questions answers verbatim. could participated questioning, though do so.2 exception few crew most articles seized taken piers where worked. also said recorder lighter moored piers. At 7:30 released. 6 No charges lodged against authorities. But month later arrested City police charge grand larceny theft recorder, thereafter temporarily suspended licenses longshoreman. subsequently reduced petit scheduled trial Court Special Sessions City. hearing looking revocation deferred outcome case. 7 set trial, instituted action United States District Southern seeking enjoin using property incriminating testifying respect thereto, sought return property.3 basis claim statement products illegal conduct part officers. 8 granted relief, limited however, home, incriminatory following testimony respecting matters.4 It held seizure violated Rule 41(a) Federal Rules Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A.,5 procured violation 5(a) those Rules,6 Commissioner within reasonable after 'the result * seizure.' In consequence illegalities follow. An deemed necessary officials effective. D.C., 189 F.Supp. 237. Appeals affirmed divided vote. Cir., 293 F.2d 368. Since equity power premises presented important touching upon federalstate relationships realm prosecutions, we here. 368 984, 82 602, 522. Accepting purposes holdings courts enjoinability nevertheless conclude improvidently issued.7 10 Courts traditionally refused, except rare instances, prosecutions. principle 'is impressively reinforced merely relations between coordinate political authorities issue.' Stefanelli v. Minard, 342 117, 120, 72 118, 96 L.Ed. 138. has manifested numerous decisions involving State's its law. E.g., Pugach Dollinger, 365 458, 81 650, 678; Douglas Jeannette, 319 157, 63 877, 87 1324; Watson Buck, 313 387, 61 962, 85 1416; Beal Missouri Pac. R. Co., 312 45, 418, 577. considerations prompted denial injunctive relief affecting prosecutions epitomized case, sanction prevent alleged Fourteenth Amendment: '(W)e would expose every State insupportable disruption. Every procedural due process law—with far-flung undefined range—would invite flanking movement system resort forum, review if need be Court, determine issue. Asserted unconstitutionality impaneling selection juries, failure appoint counsel, admission confession, creation unfair atmosphere, misconduct court—all provide ready opportunities, conscientious counsel bound employ, subvert orderly, effective local crime courts. To suggest difficulties is recognize their solution.' U.S., 123—124, 121, 122. 12 below recognized validity nonetheless required Rea States, 350 214, 76 292, 100 233. accused indicted court moved order under 41(e) Procedure suppressing certain narcotics invalid face. motion. Despite order, secured caused rearrested charged, court, possession same statute, threatened based warrant. invoking 'supervisory powers over agencies' (id., 216—217, 294), reversed directed requested frustration suppression ordered.8 Both evidently mean transgressing may always enjoined utilizing ill-gotten gains victim directly indirectly passing along use.9 13 We not, instance correctness courts' broad reading cf. Wilson Schnettler, 381, 632, 620, here enjoined.10 For event does support official. special pains point there 'asked nor way interfere agencies law,' 216, 294, further '(n)o official,' id., 217, 294. barren suggestion inroads intended. no answer say, did, being capacity official, witness invited observe activity agents,' F.2d, 369. abundantly clear occurrences precisely because official connection Commission. expressly '(t)he Commission,' 'had (respondent) Bolger's detention,' F.Supp., 244, 'was questioning (of Bolger) representative 255. 15 Nor can find justification rationale Such must stand own bottom. decide petitioner's status ignored shown misconducted himself affair, utilized means shielding conduct, received direct order. Here factor investigation11 simply commendable both waterfront.' 255.12 On record upshot matter that, insofar concerned, justifies disregard teachings Stefanelli. vitality principles latter rested sapped Court's decision Mapp Ohio, 367 643, 1684, overruling Wolf Colorado, 338 25, 69 1359, 93 1782, extend exclusionary rule Weeks 232 383, 34 341, 58 652. denying laid side possible impact Wolf. 119 120. 16 withholding deprive opportunity correction constitutional rights proceedings. extent violated, cf., e.g., supra, raise objection seek adverse determination Appeals. permit claims litigated collaterally, here, effect frustrate deep-seated policy piecemeal review. 17 involve infractions Rules, reversible Cf., Gallegos Nebraska, 55, 141, 86. think justified circumstances Assuming properly exercise federal-court supervisory them, consider supplementing should issue least purpose avoid requirements acquired intrusion processes comport proper federal-state relationships. granted, judgment accordingly reversed. 19 Reversed. 20 GOLDBERG, concurring result. 21 I concur cannot, join opinion, pass 233, ever even 'there order.' me consideration obviated commendably given 1081.1 Because strongly adhere principle, stated clarity 138, governing 'touch perhaps sensitive source friction Nation, namely, active administration crimes solely States,' granting cases substantial likelihood will exclude issue, essential vindication overriding virtual certainty exclusion proceedings satisfy encourage engage conduct. Thus, deterrence illegality, underlay Rea, determining grant effectuate policy. 22 stating my position rely Appeals' announced view regards extending 'fruit poisonous tree,' holding arrived facts similar involved People Rodriguez, N.Y.2d 279, 286, 229 N.Y.S.2d 353, 357, 183 N.E.2d 651, 653— 654 (1962). therefore appears all With reference hearing, am aware yet applicability civil proceedings,2 indeed, Fourth Amendment totally settled.3 However, encouragingly constructive approach application decision, 'quasi-criminal' character proceedings, take view, Stefanelli, orderly proceed first. 23 states 'To here.' I, like reach so belief will, Mapp, likely possibility me, firm sufficient unwise power. Whether similarly excludible premised officers' misbehavior contravention decided.4 There strong interest, many reflect, McNabb 318 332, 608, 819; Mallory 354 449, 77 1356, 1479, ensuring compliance rules having force law, designed safeguard citizens charged acts. Supremacy Clause Constitution compels enforce interest excluding including reverse 'silver platter' situations wherein handed serious appropriate 24 DOUGLAS, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE concurs, dissenting. 25 agree concerning Amendment. That now raised 1081. My stem flagrant fruits cases. If suggested, makes unreviewable claim, correct abuse authority now. 26 customs suspected thefts occurring waterfront. Two stopped Bolger suspicion Saturday, 12, 1959. Their produced couple wipers 'made England,' easily York. But, response agents' several seamen. Instead taking 5(a), questioning. There, refusing request consult lawyer employing trickery, got home. ensuing conducted a.m., tending incriminate Bolger. Upon returning headquarters, damaging statements him. Cleary, investigator invitation agents. Though participate free so. 27 proceeding revoke license agent. suit producing material either 28 office blocks prior 41(a). relied concerned; added remedy characterized 'human recorder,' flout strictures imposed Rules. concluded, 'Cleary restrained unlawful acts acting behalf States.' 256. 29 Only appealed; supra. difference attempt results lawbreaking available state.' Id., 30 saying (is) ample appealed barred U.S.C. § 2283 (28 U.S.C.A. 2283) stay court.' 370. themselves enjoined. Enjoining offering unlawfully different 'proceedings court' than enjoining officer. sure, earlier prosecution; protect proves too much, enable violate fear injunction, produce prosecution. 31 producing, proceeding, 32 lest accomplish boosting Oliver Twists through windows built narrow ingress.* say nonparticipating observer, Twist innocent child. produced, viz., method obtaining go unchecked. 33 'Free open commended encouraged. Yet kind hardly promoted implicitly invites (to provisions Rules). If, hand, understood fruit (conduct) (federal) inadmissible (state) inducement subterfuge evasion investigation'—to paraphrase related area. See Elkins 364 206, 221—222, 80 1437, 1446, 1669. Unless subverted unhealthy statefederal What interject itself defendant's infringement, 678, police. involves entrenchment federalism hold production regardless seeks introduce it. rather responsibility assuring law-enforcement procedures prescribed cannot met thwarted employment Twist. 35 BRENNAN, 36 dissenting Brother DOUGLAS add words conclusion. I. 37 concedes arguendo violations 41 Procedure. concession—compelled, think, 2921—the excludes injunction: 'injunctive (cannot) bottom.' finds 'bottom,' otherwise himself. reasoning, submit, withstand scrutiny. 38 incidental surely flouts settled equity. Equity justice halves; remedies flexible. 'A writ capable more modifications law; malleable moulded occasions instrument hands applications dispensing complete parties.' Tucker Carpenter, Fed.Cas.No.14217 (Cir.Ct.D.Ark. 1841); see Joyce, Injunctions (1909), 2; Pomeroy, Jurisprudence (5th ed. Symons, 1941), 114.2 'Complete justice' done used witnessed, indeed abetted, violations. 39 vacation ground wrongdoer wholly misconceives nature equitable relief. punitive remedial, measured transgressions plaintiff's needs. trade secret, third persons secret divulged notice breach trust. See, Colgate-Palmolive Co. Carter Products, Inc., 230 855, 864 865 (C.A.4th Cir.1956). malefactors, is; give wrong protection. herein entitled protection comprehends ancillary qua misconduct, avail harm repeat: errs asserting bottom; supplemental decree fully justified, accordance conventional equity, 40 dispel threatens impairment harmonious workings federalism. officer's duties cooperate duty abet facilitate forbid profit doctrine Terms ago, anchored our disruptive allowing introduction 221, Surely converse situation less productive needless conflict. truth, promote, retard, healthy bogey disruption relies heavily improper manifestly inapt. compelled while confirming absorbed Due Process Amendment, left devise authorized trials sanctioned accomplishing what forbade directly. overruled particular. 1081, accommodation longer concern. 42 Moreover, instant whose ought remedied State, engaged violative them. Responsibility enforcing lies whereas regime Amendment's right privacy lay exclusively court. Indeed, light emerge perfectly consistent; significant author joined Rea. 43 worth observing Congress specify conditions shall withhold 2283, 2283. nowhere mentions provision, total inapplicability hand plain: preclude specific bar, submit obligated allow conformity accepted usages procedure. II. 44 share GOLDBERG probable challenged evidence, whole part, sufficiently serve deter lawless actions grounded governed Among adequate bars seems applicable long Henrietta Mills Rutherford County, 281 126—127, 50 270, 272, 74 737. believe appeal, thereby disbarred 29. adequate, theoretical availability. 'a controversy interfere. general apply, sufficiency completeness legal certain; doubtful, cognizance.' 176. How certain, complete, appeal case? uncertainty generally interpreted exclusion. obliged product Rules—no contrary assumption, 217; 391, 638 (dissenting opinion) finally, applies remit adrift sea uncertainties, very possibly him, end, whatever. uncertain, require grounds officers.3 De Veau Braisted, 363 144, 1146, 1109. detective, Machry, apparently scene stage. defendant action. second members, license-revocation dismissed arrest illegal, premise contraband. Neither determinations us. 41(a): 'Authority Issue Warrant. issued judge state, commonwealth territorial commissioner district located.' 5(a): 'Appearance Commissioner. making complaint person delay nearest nearby empowered commit offenses laws States. When filed forthwith.' 819. noted allege exceeded sum value $10,000, diversity citizenship existed. §§ 1331, 1332, 1332. jurisdiction agencies, 1343, conferred jurisdiction. exercised resolve cause existed adequately invoked. provides suppressed 'shall admissible trial.' disposed affected came down None And reasons dispose 'In bar wrongful activities All during detention, Bolger, them.' attach significance remark 'presence additional freely' (D.C., 255) originally picked up exhibited concern longshoreman's license. indicating intimidating fact Loria, 368, 223 462, 179 478 (1961); O'Neill, 148, 227 416, 182 95 (1962); 229, 651 Compare Bloodgood Lynch, N.Y. 308, 56 718 (1944), Sackler Sackler, A.D.2d 423, (2d Dept. 1962). Rogers 97 691 (C.A.1st Cir. 1938), Butler, 156 897 (C.A.10th 1946), Physic, 175 (C.A.2d 1949), One 1956 Ford Tudor Sedan, 253 725 1958). Nothing 86, decides question. 'It little lattice window, five feet half above ground: house: belonged scullery, small brewing-place, end passage. aperture small, inmates probably defend securely; large admit boy Oliver's size, nevertheless. brief Sikes's art, sufficed overcome fastening lattice; soon stood wide also.' Dickens, Adventures (N.Y.: Thomas Y. Crowell & Co.), p. 184. (and still do) dangerous decision. Happily, impaired Wilson. events distinguishable lack 'The motive remedial full adjust parties, really grow connected subject-matter suit. Its fundamental parties is, favor recovery, however partial, interested, although indirectly, decree, recovery primary object interested adjusted among entitled, liabilities apportioned, consequential interests fixed, thereto single decree.' intimation, note doubt existence unwarranted. unanimous jurisdiction; dispute exercising 219, 295 opinion). predidicate statutes intent 1343(4), jurisdictional statute. inherent orders processes, 294; Wise Henkel, 220 556, 558, 599, 600, 55 581.

Category: 8