Document: 335 U.S. 451 69 S.Ct. 191 93 L.Ed. 153 McDONALD et al.v.UNITED STATES. No. 36. Argued Oct, 13, 1948. Decided Dec. Messrs. John Lewis Smith, Jr. and Charles . Ford, both of Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Mr. Frederick Bernays Wiener, respondent. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion Court. 1 Petitioners were convicted in District Court on evidence obtained by a search made without warrant. The Appeals affirmed divided vote. 166 F.2d 957. We brought case here certiorari because doubts whether that result squared with Johnson v. United States, 333 10, 68 367 Trupiano 334 699, 1229. 2 tried jury Columbia an indictment four counts, charging offenses carrying lottery known as numbers game violation 22 D.C.Code, §§ 1501, 1502, 1504 (1940). They found guilty all counts. 3 Petitioner McDonald, who had previously been arrested operations, under police observation several months prior to arrest. During this period while he was maintaining home Columbia, rented room residence Mrs. Terry, maintained rooming house District. His comings goings at address surveillance about two months. observed him enter during hours which operations headquarters are customarily carried on. 4 On day arrest three officers surrounded house. This midafternoon. did not have warrant nor While outside house, one thought heard adding machine. These machines frequently used operation. Believing process, sought admission 5 One them opened window leading into landlady's climbed through. He identified himself her admitted other 6 After searching rooms ground floor, they proceeded second floor. door end bedroom closed. But stood chair looked through transom. petitioners room, well slips, money piled table, machines. yelled McDonald open so. Both arrested, seized machines, suitcase papers, money. Whether these papers should suppressed returned petitioner is major question presented. 7 Fourth Amendment Constitution provides: 'The right people be secure their persons, houses, effects, against unreasonable searches seizures, shall violated, no Warrants issue, but upon probable cause, supported Oath or affirmation, particularly describing place searched, persons things seized.' guarantee protection seizures extends innocent alike. It marks privacy unique values our civilization and, few exceptions, stays hands unless issued magistrate cause oath affirmation. And law provides sanction flouting constitutional safeguard suppression secured violation, when it tendered federal court. Weeks 232 383, 34 341, 58 652, L.R.A.1915B, 834, Ann.Cas.1915C, 1177. 8 prosecution seeks build lawfulness so justify seizure See Agnello 269 20, 30, 46 4, 5, 70 145, 51 A.L.R. 409; Harris 331 150, 151, 67 1098, 1101, 91 1399. reasoning runs follows: Al hough invasion Terry's trespass violated rights Amendment, McDonald's. Therefore far concerned, lawfully within hallway, much if Terry them. Looking over transom search, eye cannot commit condemned Amendment. Since act committing offense, duty then there him. 140, 143 being valid incident thereto lawful. 9 do stop examine syllogism flaws. Assuming its correctness, we reject result. 10 where officers, passing street, hear shot cry help demand entrance name law. following keeping now tells us obtaining until, shortly before arrest, sound machine coming from vague general testimony record previous occasions warrants denied those statements alone lay proper foundation dispensing 11 Where, here, responding emergency, must compelling reasons absence A demands exceptional circumstances, held supra. will assume defendant has months, could obtained. What showing applied earlier occasions, dates applications, circumstances bearing necessity make absent record. allow barrier protects individual hurdled easily. Moreover, move scene crime, reason even less obvious. When latest, saw what transpiring certainly adequate grounds seeking 12 Here, States fleeing escape. Officers apprehend leave. Nor property process destruction likely destroyed opium paraphernalia case. busily engaged venture. No reason, except inconvenience delay preparing getting magistrate, appears failure seek justification by-passing requirement, supra, page 15, 369. 13 dealing formalities. presence serves high function. Absent some grave interposed between citizen police. done shield criminals safe haven illegal activities. objective mind might weigh need invade order enforce deemed too precious entrust discretion whose job detection crime criminals. Power heady thing; history shows acting own trusted. requires pass desires violate home. true requirement d excuse exemption mandate exigencies situation course imperative. 14 follows said McDonald's motion return granted. supra; Go-Bart Importing Co. 282 344, 358, 153, 158, 75 374. was, however, unlawfully only Washington well, jointly. Apart seems little none Washington. Even though assume, deciding, guest broken searched warrant, think denial error prejudicial well. In case, unlike 35, 7, 409, materials basis codefendant. If would available use trial. can speculate equally probative. 15 Reversed. 16 BLACK concurs 17 Justrice RUTLEDGE result, insofar relates McDonald. With respect view evidence, having illegally obtained, inadmissible. Cf. Malinski People State New York, 324 401, dissenting part 420, pages 430—432, 65 781, 790, 795, 796, 89 1029. 18 JACKSON, concurring. 19 I agree rejects courts below sustained saying wherein wrong. may helpful lower themselves state bad. 20 weeks defendant, surveillance. Commissioner approached but, appear, declined issue it. additional information led take typewriter—the witness sure which—operating premises. Certainly typewriter, standing alone, indication become significant weighed connection evidence. either refused request made. 21 However, officer charge investigation took matter his hands. neither arrest; knowledge sufficient, opinion, know suspect, time. Nevertheless, forced in. apparently plain clothes showed badge frightened woman, brushed aside unlocked doors officers. went hall occupied defendant. Seeing activity considered procedure, quarters. Government argued, court held, since entry building window, tenant rights, objection mode followed Doubtless tenant's quarters apartment legally practically exposed lawful approach good many consent control. Had guests another approaches thrown obliging landlady doorman, hallways. Like any stranger, spy eavesdrop others trespassers. peeped keyhole another's shoulders look transom, see complain. manner they, private citizen, commission, permissible. 23 me each building, exclude common hallways lawfully, does personal constitutionally protected interest integrity security entire unlawful breaking entry. Here gained access peeking post means merely unauthorized forbidden denounced criminal. prying up porch climbing bedroom, entering—a felony more serious than suppressing. Having it, felonious character entry, me, every step journey inside tainted fruits illegality. L.R.A. 1915B, 1177; Taylor 286 1, 52 466, 76 951; 367. 24 conclude urgent such emergency present Thi method enforcement displays shocking lack sense proportion. reasonable waiting obtain depends somewhat gravity offense progress hazards attempting reach watching criminal operation, shabby swindle quite suppressing, endangered life limb peace community continued two; racket abandon. Conduct solitary vice, practiced secrecy discoverable crashing dwelling houses. real difficulty otherwise law-abiding flourishes widely involves multitudes people. proposition homes, tenement, indiscriminately invaded suspicious involve violence threats human enough apply letter indulgence deal crimes endanger security, notable dealt category crime. Almost exception, overzeal suppressing acts malum se prohibitum.1 enterprise parting fools 'numbers' ought suppressed, important society seizures. undertakes § position pointing immediate consequences postponed action get 25 am reluctant conclusion enforcing exemplified violates legal certain troubles continued. That occasion due luck foresight. Many home-owners crime-beset city doubtless armed. woman sees strange man, clothes, in, natural impulse shoot. plea justifiable homicide awkwardly seeing gun drawn shoot first. Under want task convincing murder. reluctance condemning unconstitutional reckless fraught danger discredit agencies themselves. 26 As Washington: immunity spying listening rightfully expect shelter rooftree intrusion. reverse defendants. 27 FRANKFURTER, joined Court's also opinion. 28 BURTON, whom CHIEF JUSTICE REED join, dissenting. 29 judgment affirmed. instruments sight. There search. is, therefore, regard For stated below, believe committed clearly issuance formal At time raid, sufficient suspecting lottery, later proved 'numbers game,' conducted, form generally regarded detrimental communities flourishes. highly profitable principals expense players. Yet simple operation readily movable. Accordingly, substantial effort source. difficult locate still proof suffi ient convict midst comparatively brief periodical sessions essential computations Such operators determine day's winners arrange distribution among respective shares cash collected network writers, collectors runners. 30 prompt justified reasonably suspected operating moment. petitioners, tenants occupants object actual observance commission thereupon securing 31 primarily instance succeeded surprising periodically principal operator question. privilege accused very moment officer. arresting seize least articles sight seen arrested. distinction favor here. Also, anything material officer's presence. It, permit presented convictions charged example, instant statute forbidding lotteries Columbia; 1229, liquor control revenue statutes; 367, narcotic Nathanson 290 41, 54 11, 78 159, tariff statute. Other cases involving taxing statutes, both, numerous; e.g., Lefkowitz, 285 U.S 452, 877, 82 775; 374; Gambino 275 310, 48 137, 72 293, 1381; Amos 255 313, 41 266, 654. 369 involved cocaine 1177, mails distribute tickets.

Category: 0