Document: 470 U.S. 753 105 S.Ct. 1611 84 L.Ed.2d 662 Andrew J. WINSTON, Sheriff and Aubrey M. Davis, Jr., Petitionersv.Rudolph LEE, Jr. No. 83-1334. Argued Oct. 31, 1984. Decided March 20, 1985. Syllabus A shopkeeper was wounded by gunshot during an attempted robbery but, also being armed with a gun, apparently his assailant in left side, the then ran from scene. Shortly after victim taken to hospital, police officers found respondent, who suffering wound chest area, eight blocks away shooting. He where identified him as assailant. After investigation, charged respondent with, inter alia, malicious wounding. Thereafter Commonwealth of Virginia moved state court for order directing undergo surgery remove bullet lodged under collarbone, asserting that would provide evidence respondent's guilt or innocence. On basis expert testimony require incision only about one-half inch, could be performed local anesthesia, result "no danger on there's no general anesthesia employed," granted motion, Supreme Court denied petition writ prohibition and/or habeas corpus. Respondent brought action Federal District enjoin pending operation Fourth Amendment grounds, but refused issue preliminary injunction. Subsequently, X rays just before scheduled showed substantially deeper than had been thought when motion compel surgery, surgeon concluded anesthetic desirable. unsuccessfully sought rehearing trial court, affirmed. However, returned Court, which, evidentiary hearing, enjoined threatened surgery. The Appeals Held: proposed violate right secure person search "unreasonable" Amendment. Pp. 758-767. (a) compelled surgical intrusion into individual's body implicates expectations privacy security such magnitude may even if likely produce crime. reasonableness intrusions beneath skin depends case-by-case approach, which interests are weighed against society's conducting procedure obtain fairly determining appropriate framework analysis cases is provided Schmerber v. California, 384 757, 86 1826, 16 908, held State may, over suspect's protest, have physician extract blood suspected drunken driving without violating rights. Beyond threshold requirements probable cause warrants, Schmerber's inquiry considered other factors "reasonableness"—including extent threaten safety health, upon dignitary personal bodily integrity, community's interest accurately 758-763. (b) Under balancing test, lower federal courts reached correct here. threats posed were subject sharp dispute, there conflict concerning nature scope operation. Thus, resulting uncertainty medical risks properly account. Moreover, integrity can characterized severe. Surgery patient's consent, crime, involves virtually total divestment ordinary control probing skin. hand, Commonwealth's assertions compelling need intrude retrieve not persuasive. has available substantial additional individual accosted victim. 763-766. 717 F.2d 888 (CA 4 1983), Stacy F. Garrett, III, Richmond, Va., petitioners. Joseph Ryland Winston, respondent. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion Court. 1 908 (1966), held, violation secured subjected unreasonable searches seizures. cautioned: "That we today hold Constitution does forbid States['] minor stringently limited conditions way indicates it permits more intrusions, conditions." Id., at 772, S.Ct., 1836. In this case, seeks Rudolph Lee, attempting commit robbery, removal chest. Petitioners allege will We conclude here example "more intrusion" cautioned Schmerber, permit guaranteed 2 * A. 3 At approximately a.m. July 18, 1982, Ralph E. Watkinson closing shop night. As he locking door, observed someone gun coming toward across street. drew told freeze. fired person, fire. hit legs, while individual, appeared arrived scene shortly thereafter, ambulance emergency room Medical College (MCV) Hospital. Approximately 20 minutes later, responding another call earlier shooting occurred. area shot two individuals rob him. An took MCV still and, entered room, said "[t]hat's man me." App. 14. decided story having himself untrue wounding, counts using firearm commission felony. B 5 thereafter object collarbone. conducted several hearings motion. first testified take 45 involve three four percent chance temporary nerve damage, one permanent one-tenth death. second reexamination discovered "back inside close nerves arteries," id., 52, originally thought. Instead, now believed located "just skin." 57. centimeters (slightly inch), employed." 51. 6 judge petitioned corpus, both denied. United States Eastern grounds. injunction, holding little likelihood success merits. 551 F.Supp. 247, 247-253 (1982).1 7 October scheduled, ordered revealed fact (approximately inch) deep muscular tissue chest, desirable reasons. 8 based new evidence. rehearing, alter amend judgment previously F.Supp., 253-261 (supplemental opinion).2 divided panel Circuit (1983).3 certiorari, 466 942, 104 1906, 80 455(1984), consider whether consistently suspect kind II 9 protects "expectations privacy," see Katz States, 389 347, 88 507, 19 576 (1967)—the legitimate certain places times "the let alone—the most comprehensive rights valued civilized men." Olmstead 277 438, 478, 48 564, 572, 72 L.Ed. 944 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Putting side procedural protections warrant requirement, generally "security" "persons, houses, papers, effects" official up point surmounts specified standard, ordinarily "probable cause." point, justifiable community demand give some part advance vital law enforcement; "reasonable" Amendment's terms. 10 evidence, however, addressed claim breached protection "right people their persons . seizures" (emphasis added) test. arrested hospital receiving treatment injuries suffered automobile struck tree. 758, 1829. Despite objection, officer directed sample subsequently objected introduction obtained 11 authorities clearly believe intoxicated, 768, 1834, test exceptionally probative confirming belief. 770, 1835. Because case fell within exigent-circumstances exception necessary. Ibid. intrusive reasonably necessary accomplish its goals. Nonetheless, argued prohibited intruding needed 12 noted "[t]he overriding function protect dignity unwarranted State." 767, 1834. Citing Wolf Colorado, 338 25, 27, 69 1359, 1361, 93 1782 (1949), Mapp Ohio, 367 643, 81 1684, 1081 (1961), these values "basic free society." "[b]ecause dealing human rather interferences property relationships private papers 'houses, effects'—we write clean slate." U.S., 767-768, 1833-1835. perhaps implicated deep-rooted privacy, recognized thus required discerning facts circumstances determine justifiable. neither forbids nor all intrusions; rather, "proper constrain, such, justified circumstances, made improper manner." 13 procedure. given question outweighs stake delicate admitting few categorical answers. provides cases. 14 seizure. importance cause. 768-769, 1834-1835. And pointed out: "Search warrants dwellings, absent emergency, less concerned. informed, detached deliberate determinations invade another's indisputable great." 15 standards, number "reasonableness" crucial factor analyzing health individual. "[F]or [a test] risk, trauma, pain." 771, reasonable precautions unusual untested procedures employed Schmerber; "by environment according accepted practices." Notwithstanding existence cause, crime unjustifiable endangers life suspect.4 Another integrity. Intruding living Payton New York, 445 573, 100 1371, 63 639 (1980), eavesdropping telephone conversations, 361, 516, forcing accompany station, Dunaway 442 200, 99 2248, 60 824 (1979), typically do injure physical Such do, damage sense dictates. noting "a commonplace days periodic examinations," 1836, tests constitute unduly extensive imposition integrity.5 17 Weighed This course great importance. highly effective means degree influence alcohol." clear indication [desired] [would] found" undertaken. Especially difficulty proving drunkenness means, considerations results enforce laws. sufficient justify intrusion, purposes. III 18 Applying result. plainly conduct search. addition, parties agree full measure able fully litigate difficult legal questions necessarily involved magnitude.6 Our therefore must focus State's dispute between parties. Before revelations carried out "with risk [respondent]." 252. it, increased added." 260. examined record suffer associated procedure.7 One discovering exact location "could retracting muscle tissue," carrying concomitant injury well nerves, vessels pleural cavity." F.2d, 900. further greater larger incisions increase infection." stated 15-20 minutes, predicted hours. account.8 21 Both purely reasons use anesthetic,9 "extensive" When consent patient, requiring demeaning intrusive. own preserved. proposes body, "drug citizen—not yet convicted criminal offense—with narcotics barbiturates unconsciousness," 901, 22 balance concerns bullet. claims demonstrate Watkinson's turn show robber confronted Watkinson. although recognize making strength petitioners' hardly very relied tend vitiate night robbery. No party suggests entirely spontaneous identification inadmissible. petitioners doubt prove store incident place. certainly (under collarbone) seems correlate report "jerked" left. 13. origin restricts contemplated surgery.10 23 weighing various reach same conclusion below. protected interests. operation, extremely severe, considerable dispute; militates finding "reasonable." entailed useful prosecuting failed it. terms IV 24 safeguard citizen governmental any expectation privacy. Where lesser see, e.g., Rakas Illinois, 439 128, 421, 58 387 (1978); South Dakota Opperman, 428 364, 96 3092, 49 1000 (1976), minimal interests, Hensley, 469 221, 675, 83 604 (1985); 210-211, 2255-2256; Brignoni-Ponce, 422 873, 880, 95 2574, 2579, 607 (1975); Adams Williams, 407 143, 92 1921, 32 612 (1972); Terry 392 1, 1868, 889 (1968), correspondingly stringent. Conversely, command requires our society recognizes significantly heightened interest, justification make principles, 25 Affirmed. 26 BLACKMUN REHNQUIST concur judgment. 27 Chief BURGER, concurring. 28 I join because read Court's preventing detention grounds natural functions disclose presence contraband materials secreted internally. Respondent's styled corpus 42 U.S.C. § 1983 relief sought, unnecessary res judicata, Allen McCurry, 449 90, 101 411, 66 308 bar consideration claim. 252, n. 4. reopen dismiss ground time "in custody" purposes 2241. rejected contention, objecting future custody place performed. 257-259. cognizable 1983. 888, 893 (1983). cross-petitioned review holding, us. supra, did attempt relitigate issues litigated court. agreed conclusion, 258-259, fair opportunity 895-899. filed day informed changed regarding 19, hearing 21. "satisfied counsel able, despite obviously diligent effort, independent outside physicians consult anesthesiology prepare presentation anesthesia." 897. Yet, grant repeated request continuance. arbitrary truncation preparation deprived [respondent] relevant witnesses testify those factors," 898-899, preclusive effect court's findings. challenge ruling. Numerous factor. See, Bowden State, 256 Ark. 820, 823, 510 S.W.2d 879, 882 (1974) (refusing risk); People Smith, Misc.2d 210, 362 N.Y.S.2d 909 (same); Allen, S.C. 595, 291 S.E.2d 459 (1982) 900 (CA4 1983) (case below); 905-908 (Widener, dissenting); Crowder, 177 U.S.App.D.C. 165, 169, 543 312, 316 (1976) (en banc), cert. denied, 429 1062, 97 788, 50 779 (1977); Overstreet, 621, 628 (Mo.1977) banc). See Note, 68 Marq.L.Rev. 130, 135 (1984) (discussing involving intrusions); Notre Dame L.Rev. 149, 152-156 55 Texas 147 (same). Mandell & Richardson, Surgical Search: Removing Scar Amendment, 75 J.Crim.L. C., 3, p. 525 (1984). 13, (" 'The become routine everyday life. It ritual going military service applying marriage licenses. Many colleges permitting entrance literally millions us voluntarily gone through same, though longer, becoming donors' ") (quoting Breithaupt Abram, 352 432, 436, 77 408, 410, 448 (1957)). minimized "involves pain," contrasted sharply practice Rochin 342 205, 183 (1952), broke capsules put mouth, emetic administered induce vomiting. 166, 206. Rochin, recognizing "human dignity," 174, seizure unconstitutional Due Process Clause. afforded benefit adversary appellate review, special protections. Cf. 316; Lawson, 187 N.J.Super. 28-29, 453 A.2d 556, 558 (App.Div.1982). concluded, specific putting minimal." Testimony shown harm death quite low, statistical group lowest "minor" 99. "major" controlling. "there reason suppose definition term art should coincide parameters constitutional standard." 260 (quoted 901); accord, S.W.2d, 628. mean application concepts ignored. categorization multifaceted undertake. Somewhat different raised became refusal cooperate. supra. There value bullet, retrieved. comparison markings, any, shoulder fire gun. supports possible. bullet's markings corroded shoulder, useless 15. argues incapable firing bullets consistent set markings. Joling, Overview Firearms Identification Evidence Attorneys I: Salient Features Evidence, Forensic Sci. 153, 154 (1981). devoid test-fire remains possibility impossible below findings hesitate significant weight analysis.

Category: 0