Document: 416 U.S. 430 94 S.Ct. 1780 40 L.Ed.2d 250 Lonnie GOODING, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 72—6902. Argued Feb. 25, 1974. Decided April 29, Syllabus Petitioner, charged with illegal possession of drugs, made a motion to suppress the physical evidence seized in petitioner's apartment on February 12, 1971, at 9:30 p.m. by District Columbia police officers pursuant magistrate's search warrant. Although no provisions D.C.Code were explicitly referred to, petitioner apparently contended, inter alia, that warrant was executed nighttime violation § 23—521(f)(5), which specifically requires warrants be served daytime unless certain statutory conditions are met, none satisfied here. The Court granted motion, rejecting Government's contention issued under 21 U.S.C. 879(a), relates only searches for 'controlled substances' and provides may 'at any time day or night' as long issuing authority is probable cause exists believe there grounds 'and its service such time.' Appeals reversed ground 879(a) applicable statute terms had been satisfied. Held: 1. Title part comprehensive federal scheme control drug abuse, applies this case. Pp. 446—454. (a) standards issuance wattant should governed nationwide legislation rather than local D.C. laws. A United States Attorney filed application Federal Magistrate, alleging violations Code indicted. P. 447. (b) Though affiant officer executing police, officers, legislative history stressed enforcement, Congress manifested purpose dispense aid other enforcement personnel dealing narcotics problem. 447—450. (c) If prevail, general would govern when investigating but not crimes, despite fact historically played prominent role 18 1405 (1964 ed.), predecessor 879(a). 450—454. 2. true statute, special showing search, showing, here, contraband likely property person searched time. 454—458. 155 U.S.App.D.C. 259, 477 F.2d 428, affirmed. Herbert A. Rosenthal, Jr., Washington, D.C., petitioner. Andrew L. Frey, respondent. Mr. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 Petitioner case presents claim offered against him his trial have suppressed because it governing provisions. led seizure conducted Metropolitan Police Department approximately within Columbia. Armed warrant, entered discovering substantial amount narcotics. parties urge upon us differing theories concerning bears legality we must therefore interpret reconcile several recent congressional enactments seem embody somewhat inconsistent views.1 2 agreed Court's description congeries statutes "bramblebush uncertainties contradictions,"2 mere summary attests accuracy observation: 3 Statutes: older two conceivably relevant statutes, 33 414 (1973),3 enacted 1956 authorizes This section does limit during made, stating plainly '(t)he judge commissioner shall insert direction night.' liberal provision direct contrast more restrictive second considered, 23 521(f)(5),4 set forth 23—522(c)(1) met. These essentially require need night, concededly 4 Statutes Rules: found Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 41.5 At took place, Rule 41(c) provided except where 'the affidavits positive place searched.'6 In event could 'that incorporated Rules 1948 replacement language previously contained Espionage Act 1917.7 relating 879(a),8 1970. That so 'is exist turn successor ed.),9 relax 'positivity' test 41 cases involving narcotic drugs.10 passed response complaints law positivity requirement gave commercial dealers definite advantage over agents. specific statutes.11 5 magistrate facts understood context these statutes. On 11, an Assistant applied Magistrate sitting authorizing included brief notation: 'Violation: U.S.C.; 26. Sections: 4704a.' connection application, vice squad appeared before swore he reason concealing held same code provision.12 supplemented personal testimony written affidavit, outlining basis detail 'illegal drugs sold possessed Code, 26, Section 4704a.'13 affidavit concluded language: 'I am Gooding secreting inside 1419 Chapin Street N.W. USCode.' 6 then directing Chief 'any member MPDC' apartment.14 noted 26 4704(a) ed.) those established make search. also stated phrase accompanied footnote reference 41(c), presumably asserted 'positive' apartment. One briefs suggests form preprinted contemplated standards.15 7 p.m.16 engaged all members Department, uncovered quantity materials. They formed charging ed.)17 174 ed.).18 Following indictment 6, discovered 12 8 Several support particularly '(t) night did comply . ..'19 argument D.C.Code, requiring justify requirements reasoning persuasive suppress. Rejecting court stated: 9 'Whatever generally parts country, however, finds existence remove from explicit newly 23, D.C.Code.'20 10 Having decided applied, admitted some uncertainty about status 33—414, puzzlement mention suggested simply overlooked.21 Nevertheless, determined 11 '(p)ending prompt review determination action, pending interpretation 414(h) light new provisions, respects 523(b).'22 Concededly 23. 13 Circuit Court,23 although three judges who composed panel completely proper rationale. All agreed, likewise submitted section. Judge Wilkey Fahy greater required searches, establish premises search.24 Robinson believed additional case.25 14 urges reverse either both alternative grounds. First, repeats assertion, sustained Court, that, Government has conceded, title Second, argues if considered provision, made. We agree case, here.26 15 * unique situation Columbia, legislates specially Nation, gives rise principal difficulties For deal here schemes independent bodies, possibly overlapping single body. Despite potential overlap, think operative surrounding strongly indicate Congress—that is, 879(a)27—rather To begin with, Attorney, discretion proceed law, Code. Application located building, neither nor supporting After materials seized, indicted law. 16 contends, apply well swearing presented Department. He intended solely agents Bureau Narcotics Dangerous Drugs, whom involved whereas provide regulation offenses. reinforces noting former regulating 'a directed authorized enforce assist enforcing provisions,'28 while appears 879. Therefore, says petitioner, longer 17 arguments cannot dismissed lightly, find them ultimately unpersuasive. hints framework Controlled Substances Act, 84 Stat. 1242, policing function primary responsibility Drugs.29 But focus Bureau's seems entirely natural view one Act's purposes 'collect diverse laws piece facilitate research, educational related facilities.'30 providing expected pay attention agency up mean wished given assistance. failure include obtain offenses taken deliberate exclusion overall framework. previous will seemed unnecessary, cooperation between 4—138 '(a)ny arrest, District, force ..'31 Thus, custom already assured availability police. Furthermore, stresses stronger laws, goal hardly advanced reducing forces available execute fact, now 879(b), permitting 'no-knock' conditions, most controversial sections entire bill, defended primarily pressing added weapons combat increased traffic.32 19 Finally, urged leave able amended 41, deny statute. officer' defined category General request warrant'—may applications Rule. since listed among agencies authorized.33 accepted, seemingly cases, crimes. result ed.). 20 There little indication serve sweeping attributes it.34 relies Reform Criminal Procedure substantially reorganized system, jurisdiction relieving much burden.35 Prior felonies tried their applied. creation Superior created procedural rules, and, though important changes rules quite closely tracked Rules. It unreasonable, therefore, suggest warrants, 23—521 et seq. similar into rules36 promulgated 1, counterpart 41. Rule, discussed infra, courts first controlled.37 conclusion reinforced subsequently modified resemble rule. less rule, daytime, 'unless authority, appropriate reasonable shown, execution times daytime,' abandons old, cumbersome standard. concern individual privacy revealed thus well, Congress, earlier version nevertheless showed clear intention intact including, course, controlled substances.38 limited counterbalanced public effective enforcement. do enacting struck different balance involved. 22 conclude, Appeals, Our remaining task determine whether II 'A substances 24 Only last seven words really controversy contends language, day. His adopted, least part, Appeals. Government, hand, show sought-after sufficiently meets imposed 25 itself crystal issue. insists unmistakable clarity separate finding according satisfy himself believing daytime. While possible meaning, means meaning attributable words. Petitioner's assumes reads: 'There italicized four words; makes distinction whatever literally read well. idea particularized novel lacks even Congress. 27 concerned intrusion resulting logical 'probable time,' searches. interpretation, literal reading wholly convincing. traditional limitation placed evident require, searching searched. Thus Congress' very choice cause' apply, offering immediately ascertainable standard what constitute night. 28 roundabout way limiting statute's intent, sharply manner showings example, supra, specifies 'be hours daylight' (emphasis added) itemized 1972, states: 'The daytime.' (Emphasis added.) done largely free ambiguity militates assertion face supports position. 29 lends cuts way. Both House Senate Committee Reports bill prepared Justice, bill's drafting 30 'Spection 702(a) (now 879(a)) incorporates (s) satisfaction warrant.'39 31 As noted, 'satisfied ..' Case uniformly interpreted necessary search.40 32 suggestion hearings debates change prior area intended. went unmentioned surprising omission effected cutback did. Of like import heated discussions 702(b), so-called defender saw fit argue caused no-knock partially offset difficulty obtaining executable night.41 silence particular give extensive consideration neighboring easy interpret, unusual significant proposed escaped notice. note enactment, including present form. Since stress major supply tools increasing use totally illogical submit making difficult traffic hard drugs. surrender convince bring theory rests speculation. absolutely price paid thought much-desired reorganization expansion 34 conclude time.42 met continuing apartment, purchase through informer confirmed available. sufficient judgment 35 Judgment 36 DOUGLAS, BRENNAN MARSHALL concur, dissenting. 37 heroin paraphernalia moved home secured suppression §§ 23—521—523 (1973) daylight absent contrary authorizaton founded judicial officer's 38 (A) daylight, (B) sought removed destroyed forthwith, (C) circumstances 23—522(c)(1).1 39 night,' itself. obtained they failed waiting instead until date. delayed after ended, invalid 523. holds, inapplicable became October 27, 1970, 801 seq.; substances. Act. latter distinguish prosecutions innovations.2 restriction intrusions instances 'some justification it,'3 implementing 'policy disfavoring executions, intrusions, characteristic 'police state' lacking respect due process right dictated Constitution ..'4 Approximately 60% relate violations. aware this, protections unnecessary expect expression intent. I Gesell intent indicated. '(w)hatever country D.C.Code.' 328 F.Supp. 1005, 1007. sustain order. 42 MARSHALL, DOUGLAS join, 43 my Brother accordingly, join dissenting opinion. majority rejects goes discuss cases. Obviously, far significance, national purely concern. let construction pass without registering dissent issue 44 me, analyzes vacuum, discussion policy considerations underlie question interpretation. Perhaps partial vacuum description, obviously fully cognizant governmental interest serves. concerns implicated our enactment restricting protection course constitutional recognition Fourth Amendment. oblivious considerations. Taking account, acceptable above ordinary crime committed 45 Fundamentally extent enjoy homes middle Amendment protect expectations unjustified intrusion. Katz v. States, 389 347, 360—362, 88 507, 517, 576 (1967) (Harlan, J., concurring). view, expectation demanding alone unnecessarily forcing night—frequently, knocking announcing purpose—rousing residents out beds, stand indignity clothes rummage belongings indeed smack "police Constitution.' S.Rep.No.91—538, p. (1969). outrage series mistaken raids Collinsville, Illinois, April, see N.Y. Times, Apr. 1973, col. 5; 30, serves emphasize just how guarantees are. 46 consistently recognized engendered residence order magnitude produced Harlan observed holding unconstitutional Jones 357 493, 498, 78 1253, 1257, 1514 (1958): '(I)t imagine severe invasion private home.' Coolidge New Hampshire, 403 443, 477, 91 2022, 2043, 49 564 (1971), again midnight entry 'extremely serious intrusion.' And decision Griswold Connecticut, 381 479, 85 1678, 510 (1965), large based revulsion marital bedroom discover contraceptive use. See id., 485—486, 1682. 47 small wonder, stringent needed authorize setting procedures, Tit. XI 1917, 217, 229, 620 (1940 When replaced 1946, carried forward stringency requirement, remained recently, 1972 amendments 'REASONABLE CAUSE' FOR NIGHTTIME EXECUTIOn significantly retained principle cause. DOUGLAS' amply demonstrates Ante, 460.1 48 strong underlying clear. concedes, 'searches involve justification.' Brief 14. imperative. doctrine increasingly intrusive Camara Municipal 387 523, 87 1727, 930 (1967), administrative inspections, quantum inspection reasonableness White stated, 'there can ready determining balancing entails.' Id., 536—537, S.Ct., 1735. approved 'involve relatively urban citizen's privacy.' 537, Terry Ohio, 392 20—21, 1868, 1879, 889 (1968); Couch 409 322, 349 n. 93 611, 626, 548 (Marshall, dissenting). regard one-way street, used water down intrusions. situations—and paradigm—this Cf. Stanford Texas, 379 476, 506, 511—512, 431 (1965). resolved authorization justification, constitutionally implement, posed majority's surely faced. Viewed background, plain rejected. 50 me face, imposes distinct requirements: 'for merely 'incorporates' predecessor, this: adds final clause—'and time'—which heart dispute plausible clause 51 conceding 'possible' clause, 'it words.' 455. Unfortunately, failes come Instead, reads disputed entirely, decress there. holds time' 458. necessarily includes objects probably Sgro 287 206, 210—211, 53 138, 140, 77 L.Ed. 260 (1932); Schoeneman 115 110, 113, 317 173, 176—177 (1963); Rosencranz 356 310, 315—318 (CA1 1966). clearly mandated leaves 879(a)—the here—totally meaning. Thomas, 294 A.2d 164, 170 (DC Ct.App.) (Kelly, dissenting), cert. denied, 992, 341, 258 (1972); Gooding, 273, 442 (Robinson, concurring result). subscribe evisceration statute.2 52 bases meager recorded unambiguous helpful look history. Ex parte Collett, 337 55, 61, 69 944, 947, 1207 (1949); Oregon, 366 643, 648, 81 1278, 1281, 575 (1961). committee reports often guide ambiguous disregarded Helvering City Bank Farmers Trust Co., 296 85, 89, 56 70, 72, 80 62 (1935); George Van Camp & Sons Co. American Can 278 45, 253 254, 112, 73 (1929). land, report represent accurately views hundreds legislators voted bill. event, resort examination nearly conclusive statement 1405, construed impose Yet fails explanation meaning—or, it, lack meaning—of basically goals But, frequently warned, '(i)t best treacherous Congressional adoption controlling rule law.' Girouard 69, 66 826, 830, 90 1084 (1946); H.M. Hart Sacks, Legal Process: Basic Problems Making Law 1395—1398 (tent. ed. 1958), cited. effect presumes explain acquiescence Department's apparent purpose. 54 presume contrary. consistent imposing restrictions language. lead viewed another manifestation home. law-enforcement objectives legislation. shown necessity still easing embodied otherwise many covered respectfully dissent. violated nonetheless suppressed. occasion reach argument. 261, (1973), quoting 1008 1971). '§ 33—414. Search warrants—Requirements—Form—Contents Return—Penalty interfering service. '(a) manufactured, possessed, controlled, sold, prescribed, administered, dispensed, compounded, chapter, designed unlawful manufacturing, possession, controlling, selling, prescribing, administering, dispensing, compounding, thereunder, subject disposition thereof house concealed. '(b) supported describing '(c) must, examine oath complainant witnesses produce, take depositions writing subscribed them. '(d) tending exist. '(e) thereupon existence, signed him, superintendent department, names persons whose thereof, commanding forthwith named specified commissioner. '(f) mentioned direction, person, being acting execution. '(g) break open outer inner door window house, anything therein, if, notice purpose, refused admittance. '(h) 23—521. Nature Under described subchapter, prosecutor. anywhere terms. following: '(1) designated places premises; '(2) vehicles; '(3) objects; '(4) persons. kinds property, include, circumstances, taking impressions, performing chemical, scientific, tests experiments of, from, premises, vehicles, objects. Property it— stolen embezzled; illegally possessed; used, commit conceal commission criminal offense; constitutes tends demonstrate offense identity participating offense. addressed classification arrests contain— name court, signature officer, date issuance; otherwise, classifications addressed; designation objects, searched, certainty identification; object warrant; '(5) or, therefor, 522(c)(1), night; '(6) subparagraph (A), (B), (D) 23—591(c)(2), enter dwelling building vehicles giving purpose; '(7) inventory thereto returned next 23—522. Applications Each affirmation officer. include— applicant; kind character 23—521(d) premise, vehicle subject, persons; allegations statement; question. applicant containing application. hour circumstances; houses buildings 23—591(c)(2) executed. 'Any subsection request.' read, follows: 'Search Seizure Authority Issue Warrant. state, commonwealth territorial record district wherein located. Grounds Issuance. seize Stolen embezzled States; Designed committing Possessed, 18, U.S.C., 957. Issuance contents. Warrant sworn establishing exist, identifying naming civil President States. state thereof. command specified. designate returned. Scope Definition. modify act, term 'property' documents, books, papers tangible objects.' part: located, attorney government. (1) (2) contraband, fruits crime, things criminally (3) hearsay whole part. Before ruling appear personally proceeding reporter recording equipment affidavit. period exceed days, definition. 'daytime' hourse 6:00 a.m. 10:00 'federal government agent, 54(c), 10, 229. '21 warrants. 1405. warrants—procedure. 'In subchapter chapter Internal Revenue 1954 penalty 7237 (c), (h), (i) Narcotic Drugs Import Export (21 sec. 174), July 1941, 184a)— Commissioner provisions.' See, e.g., H.R.Rep.No.2546, 84th Cong., 2d Sess., (1956). Stallings, 413 200 (CA7), 396 972, 460, 440 (1969); Castle, 213 1962). privacy, demonstrated limitations later, implication argues. ignores 1956, dangerous deliberately stricter represents departure area, contrary, conceded almost years. full: 'BEFORE Lawrence S. Margolis, Wash., undersigned duly deposes says: 'That (has believe) (on known as) Street, N.W., you elevator floor Washington concealed namely heroin, syringes, tourniquets, cookers preparation retail dispensation held, U.S.Code 4704(a). 'And foregoing attached hereto hereof. /s/ Marion Green MARION GREEN MPD' states specifically: 'I, assigned Third Vice Squad, working undercover capacity 4704a. Had investigate following offense.' entirety: 'To Member MPDC 'Affidavit having Plc. Marrion [sic] Green, Jr. Squad floor, namely, capsules, envelopes, distribution instrumentalities held. hereof U.S.Code, (premises) 'You hereby commanded (place) specified, serving (at nignt [*]) leaving copy receipt taken, prepare return ten days date, 'Dated 1971 Margolis Commissioner' [*] provide: (Rule 41C).' Reply 8. brief, litigation, revised supra. resolve 4704. Packages. requirement. 'It purchase, sell, dispense, distribute original stamped package package; absence taxpaid stamps prima facie found.' 174. Same; penalty; evidence. 'Whoever fraudulently knowingly imports brings territory jurisdiction, receives, conceals, buys, sells, facilitates transportation, concealment, sale imported brought in, knowing conspires acts imprisoned five twenty years addition, fined $20,000. subsequent (as 7237(c) 1954), offender forty $20,000.' contended him. Neither below sufficiency contentions, F.Supp., 1008. 428 (1973). opinion: 'We hold 266, F.2d, 435. 'Thus, narcotics, 1405(1) later believe' 'if positive' 'property searched,' permit 268, 437. concluded: demand demonstration positively impossible summon factual prudent intrusiveness justified exigencies situation.' 274, 443. 'Where, calculated garner past terminate species ongoing criminality, nocturnal demonstrated.' 275, 444. alleged 33—414 prevail nn. 9, John Ingersoll, Director Hearings Drug Abuse Control Amendments—1970 Subcommitted Public Health Welfare Interstate Foreign Commerce, 91st ser. 91—45, pt. 86 (1970), incorporate 702(b) 32, grant 'restricted Drugs.' Serial 86. preceding expanded powers BNDD. However, excerpts position proves stronger. reasons text emphasis BNDD assisted 3052, 3053, 3056, arrest Investigation, marshals, Secret Service S.Rep.No.91—613, provides: force, backing indorsement thereof; relation bail chapter.' Thomas 993, 448, 258, (Douglas, Any imprisonment year may, given, easily quickly disposed endanger life safety shall, soon practicable entering identify her entrance premises.' H.R.Rep.No.91—1444, 1970 Cong. Admin.News, 4591, (the noknock provision), explained hearings, officials tool combatting illicit proved common Atty.Gen. Order 510—73, Fed.Reg. 7244—7245. debated below. (although sooner), matter, i.e., control. U.S.App.D.C., 262, 431. matter construction, entirety own 11-901. 'Rule Seizure. Ussue property. (4) Warrants. paragraph object, contain (ii) (iii) prosecutor subparagraphs (a), (b), (d) whereby announcement Effective Oct. amended. Paragraphs unchanged. indicated qualified D.C.App., 167—168, 41(h), 6. (g) 5, pp. 30—31 H.R.Rep.No.91 1444, (1970). proposal volume 116 Record. Cong.Rec. 1159—162, 1164—1177, 33639—33645. Fifth recently reached conclusion. 489 664 23—523(b) directs hours, express 23—521(f). 521(f)(5) allows 'judicial various elsewhere country. 23—1322, detention trial. Crime National Capital 1st 4, 1404 Similarly, States' obtained, meeting Hall, Y. Kamisar, W. LaFave J. Israel, Modern 259 (3d 1969). effort conjure drawn precision, points literally, 455—456. readily artfully drafted, justifies disregarding deal. ill suits unable construction. insubstantial. knows, ever burden appropriate; sharp contrast, acted confusion arises logically refer back eanctments shorthand authorized, see, 33—414(h), ante, 433, 3; 23—522(c)(1), 435—436, 4; cf. 436—437, Plainly complaint 'traditional limitation' suffice point 1969 old test, eliminating regardless sure 49—50. 23—523. adopted amendment introduce modification along lines

Category: 0