Document: 357 U.S. 480 78 S.Ct. 1245 2 L.Ed.2d 1503 Veto GIORDENELLO, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES of America. No. 549. Argued May 21, 1958. Decided June 30, Mr. William F. Walsh, Houston, Tex., for petitioner. John L. Murphy, respondent. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion Court. 1 Petitioner was convicted unlawful purchase narcotics, see 26 U.S.C. (Supp. V) § 4704, U.S.C.A. after a trial without jury before Federal District Court Southern Texas. A divided Appeals affirmed. 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 575. We granted certiorari to consider petitioner's challenge legality his arrest and admissibility in evidence narcotics seized from person at time arrest. 355 811, 66, 30. Agent Finley Bureau Narcotics obtained warrant petitioner United States Commissioner Texas, on January 26, 1956. This warrant, issued under Rules 3 4 Criminal Procedure, 18 (see note 3, infra), based written complaint, sworn by Finley, which read part: 'The undersigned complainant (Finley) being duly states: That or about 1956, Texas Giordenello did receive, conceal, etc., narcotic drugs, to-wit: heroin hydrochloride with knowledge importation; violation Section 174, Title Code. 'And further states that he believes _ are material witnesses relation this charge.' About 6 o'clock afternoon following day, 27, saw drive up residence car enter house. He emerged shortly thereafter drove away same car, closely followed second described as 'well-known police character.' pursued cars until they stopped near another entered When left residence, carrying brown paper bag hand, proceeded towards executed bag, proved contain mixture other substances. Although warned privilege remain silent, promptly admitted purchasing Chicago transporting it Houston. On 28 appeared counsel Commissioner. waived preliminary examination contemplated Rule 483, 1249, infra, arraigned complaint upon had been 26.1 Prior petitioner, alleging first coincident seizure were illegal, moved suppress use found bag. motion denied Court, conviction its affirmance followed. 7 In argues, below, Finley's unlawful, since illegal could be justified only incident legal arrest, consequently admission into error requires set aside. The Government contends right hence object evidence, failing question sufficiency brought It asserts satisfied and, alternatively, can sustained apart because probable cause believe committed felony. recognizes no search admissible if lawful v. Rabinowitz, 339 56, 60, 70 430, 432, 94 L.Ed. 653, reversible error. I. 8 think clear waiving Commissioner, not surrender subsequently contest court validity grounds here asserted. claim nature may involve issues subtlety complexity would unfair require defendant present so soon many instances, here, final selection counsel. 9 addition, purpose makes evident unsoundness Government's position. 5(c) Procedure provides 10 'If appears commissioner there is an offense has committed, it, shall forthwith hold him answer district court; otherwise discharge him.' 11 By examination, waives more than intended secure him—the held absence finding offense. 12 token, authority adjudicate later taken person. issue court. specifically recognized 41(e) Rules, aggrieved '* * move anything ground *' defective any several grounds. procedural path we proper put warrant. Cf. Albrecht States, 273 1, 9—11, 47 250, 253, 71 505. II. 13 challenges two grounds: (1) inadequate complaining officer, relied exclusively hearsay information rather personal executing complaint; (2) event effect recited elements crime charged, namely concealment importation 21 174.2 14 testimony hearing suppression suspicions guilt derived entirely given law enforcement officers persons none whom either submitted affidavits. But need decide whether solely information, find providing sufficient basis made. 15 provide setting forth 'the essential facts constituting charged,' showing 'that (such) *.'3 provisions these must light constitutional requirements implement. language Fourth Amendment, Warrants issue, but cause, supported Oath affirmation, particularly describing things *,' course applies well warrants. See Ex parte Burford, Cranch 448, 495; McGrain Daugherty, 135, 154—157, 319, 323, 580. protection afforded when viewed against their background, inferences lead drawn neutral detached magistrate instead judged officer engaged often competitive enterprise ferreting out crime.' Johnson 333 10, 14, 68 367, 369, 92 436. then, enable appropriate magistrate, determine 'probable cause' required support exists. judge himself persuasiveness show cause. should accept complainant's mere conclusion whose sought crime. 16 case considerations mind, does pass muster Commissioner's determination existed. contains affirmative allegation affiant spoke matters contained therein; indicate sources belief; deficiencies cured reliance presumption made officer. insubstantiality such argument illustrated very case, clearly showed charge based. circumstances, difficult understand how expected assess independently probability charged. Indeed, upheld, substantive completely 4, formal significance, entitled perfunctory approval comport protective purposes designed achieve. 17 avail argue indictment, adequate allegations suffice indictment 7(c). grand jury's existed also establishes element issuing apprehension Here, determined appear face complaint. III. lower courts defended relying warrant.4 however, principal contention permits arrested felony; controlling federal statute, turn State where source cf. Di Re, 332 581, 589, 222, 226, 210; supra, page 15, 369; testified deemed, within standards law, have necessary 19 do belated contentions open accordingly occasion soundness. To permit inject new theory stage unfairly deprive opportunity respond. assume constituted purported justification reason cross-examine adduce own rebut time. 20 Nor sound judicial administration send back special verdict guilty judgment already allowed stand. now relies uphold fully known trial, circumstances suggesting exceptional course. Shotwell Mfg. Co., 233, 245, 234. say, seek justify therefore reversed. 22 Reversed. 23 CLARK, BURTON WHITTAKER concur, dissenting. 24 I agree waive attack waiver examination. cannot conclusions which, all practical purposes, free peddler, 'a made.' 25 stated 'on importation,' citing statute violated. meet 'essential facts' requirement Procedure. contention, reverses reasoning deficient 'no (did) 39-page brief, rely satisfying 3. advancing ground. alleged actual occurrence prima facie offense—possession narcotics. Unlawful presumed. 35 Stat. 614, amended, 174. Casey 1928, 276 413, 48 373, 72 632. Petitioner's imported fact part information. thus strange say 'deficiencies' 'could (of) knowledge.' Implicit entire indulged. positive absolute certain day specific place 'did receive (and) conceal' heroin. Therefore, Court's objection, i.e., knowledge, manifestly untenable. As second, concerning 'sources belief,' something never fact, knows, considered confidential cases divulgence seldom required. Such wholly unnecessary unwarranted extension 4. Finally, catchall objection 'not basis' overlooks directly explicitly oath follows night existed, recourse Neither nor points what alleged. 27 caveat 'should conclusion' applicable here. If statement 'receive' 'conceal' drugs conclusion, fact. Unlike criminal offenses, violations intent, spell tending intent. distinction draws between untenable inferences, unlike ordinary cases. accused 'possession' offense, absent satisfactory explanation therefor. And certainly one having 'possession.' Relating served application 1948, 436, most unfortunate. obliteration valid distinctions little cases, subsequent Congress authorized make arrests 'reasonable committing' 570, 7607, 7607. fields increases great burden placed like 'sources' 'other evidentiary facts,' beclouds requisites underlying apposite those search. seen, grounds' present. Act, state permitted committed. Giacona State, Tex.Cr.R., 298 S.W.2d 587, 588—589; Thomas 163 Tex.Cr.R. 68, 69—70, 288 791, 792. Search warrants, Amendment 'notwithstanding unquestionably cause.' Agnello 1925, 269 20, 33, 46 6, 145.* strike down merely unfortunate through byplay limitations surrounding extended long-recognized powers Until came way attacked 'recited charged.' admits much. footnote majority opinion. Nevertheless, parties depending much less briefing arguing strikes breath tags 'belated' refuses account unanswerable position Government, briefed argued, upheld 210, 1950, 653. subscribe double standard. ask, fairness point below throw belated? language: 29 'Moreover, enough record honest official might thought observing restraints actions, good even invalid believed felony presence *.' (Emphasis added.) 575, 579. 30 assuming belated, our duty apply it. purblindness free, shackles enforcement. dissent. returned refer charged related offenses. One, charging possession unlawfully dropped prior trial. other, resulted conviction. primarily, entirely, prevent ground, raises simply Brotherhood Carpenters Joiners America 330 395, 412, 67 775, 784, 91 973; Weems 217 349, 362, 544, 547, 54 793; Fed.Rules Crim.Proc., 52(b). 3: empowered commit offenses States.' 4(a): offecer execute asked take notice 'complaint warrant.' 'return' Marshal leave room doubt Searches are, course, excepted.

Category: 0