Document: 387 U.S. 541 87 S.Ct. 1741 18 L.Ed.2d 930 Norman SEE, Appellant,v.CITY OF SEATTLE. Nos. 92, 180. Supreme Court of the United States June 5, 1967 Dorsen, New York City, for appellant. A. L. Newbould, Seattle, Wash., appellee. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 Appellant seeks reversal his conviction refusing to permit a representative City Seattle Fire Department enter and inspect appellant's locked commercial warehouse without warrant probable cause believe that violation any municipal ordinance existed therein. The inspection was conducted as part routine, periodic city-wide canvass obtain compliance with Seattle's Code. Ordinance No. 87870, c. 8.01. After he refused inspector access, appellant arrested charged violating § 8.01.050 Code: 2 'INSPECTION BUILDING AND PREMISES. It shall be duty Chief may all buildings premises, except interiors dwellings, often necessary purpose ascertaining causing corrected conditions liable fire, or violations provisions this Title, other concerning fire hazards.' convicted given suspended fine $1001 despite claim 8.01.050, if interpreted authorize warrantless warehouse, would violate rights under Fourth Fourteenth Amendments. We noted jurisic tion set case argument Camara v. Municipal Court, 523, 1727, 930. 385 808, 31, 17 50. find principles enunciated in applicable here therefore we reverse. 3 In Camara, held Amendment bars prosecution person who has code-enforcement personal residence. only question which presents is whether applies similar inspections structures are not used private residences. Washington, affirming conviction, suggested 'has applied different standards reasonableness searches dwellings than places business', citing Davis States, 328 582, 66 1256, 90 L.Ed. 1453. Washington court held, appellee argues, excludes 'the dwellings,'2 establishes reasonable scheme premises pursuant 4 Go-Bart Importing Co. 282 344, 51 153, 75 374; Amos 255 313, 41 266, 65 654; Silverthorne Lumber 251 385, 40 182, 64 319, uphold otherwise unreasonable criminal investigative merely because rather residential were object police intrusions. Likewise, see no justification so relaxing safeguards where official intended aid enforcement laws prescribing minimum physical premises. As explained search houses presumptively warrant. businessman, like occupant residence, constitutional right go about business free from entries upon property. too, placed jeopardy decision regulatory can made enforced by field authority evidenced 5 governmental regulation enterprise mushroomed recent years, need effective techniques achieve aims such been subject substantial comment legislation.3 Official entry property technique commonly adopted administrative agencies at levels government enforce variety laws; thus, structure housed, case, products, perusal financial books records. This had occasion consider Amendment's relation broad range investigations.4 However, have dealt issues raised another comon technique, subpoena corporate strong support these cases our conclusion warrants tolerable limitation on 6 now settled that, when an agency subpoenas records, requires sufficiently limited scope, relevant purpose, specific directive will unreasonably burdensome.5 conduct documents contemplated statute, but it must delimit confines designating needed formal subpoena. addition, while demand issued agency, form subpoena, field, subpoenaed party judicial review prior suffering penalties comply. 7 minimal limitations action think constitutionally required establishments. agency's particular access course measured, terms issue warrant, against flexible standard takes into account public involved. But product unreviewed discretion officer field.6 Given analogous functions performed entry, untenable proposition termed 'constructive' search, Oklahoma Press Pub. Walling, 327 186, 202, 494, 502, 614, 166 A.L.R. 531, do apply actual 8 conclude consent, portions premise w hich open compelled through force within framework procedure.7 way imply reasonably inspected many more situations homes, nor accepted licensing programs require operating marketing product. Any challenge resolved, past, case-by-case basis general reasonableness. hold basic component Amendment—that suitable procedure—is context, others, well Therefore, prosecuted exercising insist authorizing warehouse. 9 CLARK, whom HARLAN STEWART join, dissenting. 10 Eight years ago my Brother Frankfurter wisely wrote Frank State Maryland, 359 360, 79 804, 877 (1959): 11 'Time experience forcefully taught power dwelling places, either matter systematic area-by-area or, here, treat problem, indispensable importance maintenance community health; greatly hobbled blanket requirement evidence acts. preventive great, city after seen granted its health officials; apparently welcomed insignificant few.' At 372, 811. 12 Today renders experience, dates back Colonial days, naught overruling Maryland striking down hundreds ordinances throughout country jeopardizing thereby health, welfare, safety literally millions people. 13 all. prostitutes command 'no Warrants issue, cause' sets up codes area newfangled 'warrant' system entirely foreign standards. regrettable wipes out long widely practice creates place enormous confusion towns metropolitan cities one fell swoop. I dissent. I. 14 detail For me supra. adhere reasoning therein late Frankfurter. Time shown change. Indeed opposite true, show later. read it, guarantee individual privacy is, language, specifically qualified. prohibits those 'unreasonable.' majority seem recognize tis they new test long-recognized 'probable-cause' issuance warrants. They paper warrants, programs, based codes, rubber stamp willing magistrate.1 view, degrades Amendment. II. 15 Moreover, history supports disposition. Over 150 rem purposes continuously enforced. during period courts denied municipalities right. See District Columbia Little, 85 U.S.App.D.C. 242, 178 F.2d 13, A.L.R.2d 954 (1949), aff'd grounds, 339 1, 70 468, 94 599 (1950). addition two (Frank, supra, Ohio ex rel. Eaton Price, 364 263, 80 1463, 1708 (1960)), upheld action, single state high validity ordinances. Indeed, since five States' highest found permissible fact imperative, protection safety, welfare inhabit towns.2 16 submit carefully circumscribed requirements facts circumstances inspections, there nothing ones undertaken here. These meet consistent commands cases. There suggests unauthorized, unreasonable, improper designed prosecution; indication discriminatory, arbitrary, capricious affecting case. admittedly Code living quarters prohibited thereby; warehouse—a establishment inspection. say, however, present knowing necessity inspection, limits inspector's power, himself authorized perform search. Each supported findings type San Francisco bans engaged. Furthermore, doubts could resolved very quickly. inspectors identification cards latter easily resolve remaining questions call superior demand, receive written answer thereto. record shows challenges interposed. called several occasions, still raised.3 cases, outset, Amendmnt , surrounding attempted To therefore, left reach involved says 'inspections made, warrant.' With due respect, over century half little impose death sentence procedures now. most instances secure warrant—such See's case—thereby insulating large important segments conditions. situation even recognized Court—that should give us pause. III. 19 great emphasized Francisco, known cleanliness ever suffered earthquake 1906. fiscal year ending 30, 1965, 16,000 inspected, 5,600 some order code requirements. And 1965—1966 62,000 apartments, hotels, results. During same Public Works 52,000 building 43,000 electrical 33,000 plumbing inspections. entire less occasions householder permit. 20 site 180, 541, 1737, 943, industrial totaled 85,000 1965. Jacksonville, Florida, 21,000 carried year, excess 135,000 conducted. Portland, Oregon, 27,000 4,500 regulations uncovered marshal Portland 17,000 1965 alone. Boston 56,000 1966 Baltimore somewhat reported. 21 larger areas Los Angeles, 300,000 (health fire) revealed 28,000 hazardous violations. Chicago November December 1966, 18,000 rodent infested 46,000 Cleveland division housing 42,000 1965; establishments alone infractions reported period. problem acute. A grand jury Brooklyn survey square blocks three 12,000 restrictions Prior 567 areas. pressing additional actually time. 22 An disastrous effect frequent also dangerous community. Defective causes siphonage sewage household wastes. Chicago's amoebic dysentery epidemic example. 100 deaths resulted. conflagrations. 468 (1950), permitted two-year-oldch ild's resulting gutted home August 6, 1949, might prevented. 23 Inspections play vital role urban redevelopment slum clearance. Statistics indicate slums constitute 20% average American city, produce 35% fires, 45% major crimes, 50% disease. Today's havoc improvement remember admonition Douglas Berman Parker, 348 26, 32, 98, 102, 99 27 (1954): 24 'Miserable disreputable spread disease crime immorality. suffocate spirit reducing people live status cattle. indeed make almost insufferable burden.' IV. 25 propose answers constant codes. First, say few refusals inspect. Unlike attitude householders requiring empirical statistics attitudes consent obtained. true entry-to-inspect occupants welcome visits inspectors. view necessary. voluntary program. 16,171 calls home, 2,540 cases—approximately six. percentage intolerable burden service What 4,515 found! Hence, percentage, approximately 840 Portland. 26 Human nature being what face thousands going denied. economics result. Homeowners generally try minimize costs, landlords repairs so. Immediate prospects costly correct possible defects keep door closed inspector. said dissent 384, '(o)ne rebel year' too price pay privacy. relied 'one rebel' become rebellion. That significant increase certain and, time goes on, trend frightening reality. submitted cannot depended upon. then addresses itself propriety inspections.4 'probable says, begins requirement; determining weighed goals enforcement.' adds 'a number persuasive factors' supporting inspections.' interesting note factors relies identical gave excusing are: acceptance historically; interest safety; impersonal inspections—not crime—but welfare. Upon reasoning, concludes exists 'if legislative conducting satisfied wih respect dwelling.' vary, according program condition reference thereto dwelling. obtained refusal initial entry; distinction command. boxcar every area, save street itself. daresay printed pads thousand more—with space inserted—and magistrates broadcast fashion course. 28 ask: Why exercise, pretense? essentials followed procedures, ceremony, delay, expense, abuse warrant? destroy integrity degrade magistrate issuing them soon bring disrepute process. paperwork incident loss waste result annoyance public. burdensome inspected. Under chooses. existing times invariably convenience considered. grounds elaborated today support—both legal practical—to approved legalistic facade creates. Court's anxiety limit own holding mass hopes divert attention destroys problems contrasted ones. While important, so; Little both See. Frankly, understand how wholesale hand neighbors. Conviction jursuant 8.01.140 'PENALTY. Anyone failing comply provision Title lawful hereto thereof punishable exceed Three Hundred Dollars ($300.00), imprisonment Jail ninety (90) imprisonment, each day separate offense.' 'Dwelling' defined occupied exclusively having (2) units.' Such substantive Code, Chief's 'when therein.' 8.01.040. lacks procedure. Antitrust Civil Process Act 1962, 76 Stat. 548, U.S.C. §§ 1311—1314; H.R.Rep. 708, 83d Cong., 1st Sess. (1953), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin. News 1953, p. 2198 (reporting 'factory inspection' amendments Federal Food, Drug, Cosmetic Act, 67 476, 374); Davis, Administrative Power Investigation, 56 Yale L.J. 1111; Handler, Constitutionality Investigations Trade Commission, II, Col.L.Rev. 905; Schwartz Crucial Areas Law, 34 Geo.Wash.L.Rev. 401, 425—430; Note, Constitutional Aspects Tax Investigations, 57 676. Cardiff, 344 174, 73 189, 97 200, did compel covered Act. (As result, statute subsequently amended, n. 3, supra.) Comm'n Tobacco Co., 264 298, 44 336, 68 696, 32 786. Morton Salt 338 632, 357, 40; 531; Bausch Lomb Optical 321 707, 805, 88 1024; Hale Henkel, 201 43, 370, 50 652. Law 3.05—3.06 (1958). decide refused; surprise crucial aspect routine establishments, advance necessarily differ homes. 1453, officials obtaining seize gasoline ration coupons Government illegally possessed petitioner. thus involve issue. probable-cause laid appears appropriately function magistrate. relieve burden. unfortunate fails pass use DePass Spartanburg, 234 198, 107 S.E.2d 350 (1959); St. Louis Evans, 337 S.W.2d 948 (Mo.1960); 237 Cal.App.2d 128, 46 Cal.Rptr. 585 (1965), pet. hearing Cal.Sup.Ct. den. (Civ. 22128) Nov. 19, Commonwealth Hadley, 351 Mass. 439, 222 N.E.2d 681, appeal docketed, Jan. 1967, 1179, Misc., O.T.1966; See, Wash.2d 475, 408 P.2d 262 (1965). summoned office district attorney—but failed appear—where certainly questions. authorities making allow occurred. today, 'paper warrant' emphasizes absurdity holding.

Category: 0