Document: 427 U.S. 463 96 S.Ct. 2737 49 L.Ed.2d 627 Peter C. ANDRESEN, Petitioner,v.State of MARYLAND. No. 74-1646. Argued Feb. 25, 1976. Decided June 29, Syllabus After an investigation by a State's Attorneys' fraud unit real estate settlement activities in certain Maryland counties indicated that petitioner, while acting as attorney, had defrauded the purchaser realty (Lot 13T), investigators obtained warrants to search petitioner's offices. The listed specified items pertaining Lot 13T be seized "together with other fruits, instrumentalities and evidence crime at this (time) unknown." In ensuing number incriminating documents, including some containing statements made were seized. Petitioner was then charged, Inter alia, false pretenses based on misrepresentation title property clear. Petitioner's motion suppress documents granted but respect others trial court ruled their admission into would not violate Fourth Fifth Amendments. At trial, which resulted conviction, (including lot than located same subdivision subject liens 13T) admitted evidence, after being authenticated prosecution witnesses. Court Special Appeals affirmed conviction rejected constitutional claims. Held: 1. offices for business records, seizure, subsequent introduction did offend Amendment's proscription "(n)o person . shall compelled any criminal case witness against himself." Although records contained petitioner voluntarily committed writing, he never required say anything. seizure these conducted law enforcement personnel, when introduced they witnesses, petitioner. Therefore, compulsion speak, inherent psychological pressure respond unfavorable present. Pp. 470-477. 2. searches seizures "unreasonable" violation Amendment. 478-484. (a) rendered fatally "general" with" phrase, appeared each warrant end sentence listing seized, all 13T. This phrase must read authorizing only relating 479-482. (b) principle police seize " 'mere evidence,' probable cause examined terms believe sought will aid particular apprehension or conviction," Warden v. Hayden, 387 294, 307, 87 1642, 1650, 18 782. reasonably could have believed specifically dealing fraudulent conduct respecting used show intent defraud 13T, although such secure additional charges its suppression required. 482-484. 24 Md.App. 128, 331 A.2d 78, affirmed. Andresen, Kensington, Md., pro se, Jon F. Oster, Baltimore, respondent. A. Raymond Randolph, Jr., Washington, D. C., United States, amicus curiae, special leave Court. Mr. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion 1 presents issue whether person's during his offices, violates command We also determine here thus violated prohibition 2 * early 1972, Bi-County Fraud Unit, under joint auspices Offices Montgomery Prince George's Counties, began area. time, Andresen attorney who, sole practitioner, specialized settlements County. During Unit's investigation, came scrutiny, particularly connection transaction involving Potomac Woods included interviews purchaser, mortgage holder, lienholders well examination county land disclosed Standard-Young Associates, represented free that, accordingly, no insurance necessary, fact, knew there two outstanding property. addition, learned lienholders, threatening foreclose liens, forced halt purchaser's construction When confronted information, responded issuing, agent company, policy guaranteeing clear By action, company requiring it pay liens. 3 investigators, concluding state pretenses, see Md.Ann.Code, Art. 27, § 140 (1976), Standard-Young, applied office separate Mount Vernon Development Corporation, incorporator, shareholder, resident agent, director. application permission sale conveyance A judge Sixth Judicial Circuit County concluded issued warrants. 4 simultaneously daylight hours October 31, 1972.1 present move about. Counsel him latter half search. Between 2% And 3% Of files single investigator, presence officer, Corporation. search, taking about four hours, less 5% corporation's files. 5 eventually partly information indictment, concerning misappropriation fiduciary, similar claims three home purchasers. Before began, moved documents. held full hearing. hearing, State returned 45 52 taken from corporation. suppressed six corporation ground between them crimes charged. net result item file labeled "Potomac General." seven 28 office, determination 6 With returned, admitting It reasoned force himself because been produce nor authenticate them. Moreover, cause, either directly related therefore within express language warrants, properly otherwise admissible pattern relevant charge 7 proved primarily public provided complaining purchasers, company. introduce however, items. Three General" file, corporation, admitted. These notes handwriting employee who prepare abstracts course duties searcher clerk. concerned deeds trust affecting 13T.2 Five One transactions one buyers. second partially devoted transaction; among statements, deed conveying original copy notice buyer releases third exclusively fourth consisted trust, dated March seller lots lienholder.3 fifth drafts memoranda written handwriting. 8 jury, found guilty upon five counts fiduciary. He sentenced eight concurrent two-year prison terms. 9 On appeal Maryland, false-pretenses reversed indictment failed allege defraud, necessary element offense. Only count Standard-Young's purchase remained. Amendment Claims.4 Specifically, supported authorize general Amendment, scope agreed rights do 78 (1975). 10 certiorari limited issues. 423 822, 36, 46 39 (1975).5 II 11 applicable States Fourteenth Malloy Hogan, 378 1, 8, 84 1489, 1493, 12 653 (1964), provides As often has noted, development protection part response historical practices, ecclesiastical inquisitions proceedings Star Chamber, "which placed premium compelling subjects admit guilt own lips." Michigan Tucker, 417 433, 440, 94 2357, 2362, 41 182 (1974). See generally L. Levy, Origins (1968). "historic function" privilege protect 'natural individual compulsory incrimination through testimony personal records.' Bellis 85, 89-90, 2179, 2184, 40 678 (1974), quoting White, 322 694, 701, 64 1248, 1252, 88 L.Ed. 1542 (1944). There is question incriminating. undisputed contain Cf. Mara, 410 19, 21-22, 93 774, 35 99 (1973); Dionisio, 764, 67 Gilbert California, 388 263, 266-267, 1951, 1953, 1178 (1967); Wade, 218, 1926, 1149 Schmerber 384 757, 86 1826, 16 908 (1966). question, therefore, testify may said reserved 302-303, 1647-1648, 782 (1967), adverted Miller, 425 435, 441 n. 3, 1619, 1623, 48 71 (1976). 13 contends "the self-incrimination applies papers does produced subpoena." Brief 9. bases argument, naturally, dicta cases imply, state, private self-incrimination. Thus, Boyd 116 616, 633, 524, 534, 29 746 (1886), said: "(W)e unable perceive man's books substantially different Hale Henkel, 201 43, 76, 26 370, 379, 50 652 (1906), observed substance offense production papers, subpoena duces tecum, entitled protection." 14 agree, broad compel very recent Fisher 391, 1569, attorney's production, pursuant lawful summons, client's tax hands taxpayer "because taxpayer's lawyer 'compel' anything certainly 'witness' Id., 397, S.Ct., 1573. recognized continued validity Court's earlier discredited later opinions. 407-409, 1579-1580. those cases, legal predicate inadmissibility Amendment; unlawfulness thought supply accused invoke Amendment.6 Compulsion absent Couch 409 322, 611, 34 548 (1973), where summons served accountant possession rights.7 15 Similarly, case, asked writing. personnel. Finally, expert, Any falls stated Holmes: "A party privileged producing production." Johnson 228 457, 458, 33 572, 57 919 (1913). recognizes afforded Self-Incrimination Clause "adheres basically person, incriminate him." U.S., 328, 616. complying act constitute authentication supra, materials officers differs crucial whom directed discovery, evidence. 17 contrary undermine principles announced cases. Nearly century ago, Marron 275 192, 74, 72 231 (1927), upheld, both claims, accused's illegal liquor business. Abel 362 217, 80 683, 668 (1960), again espionage identity coded message hotel room. recognize rule: "There sanctity distinguished forms property, render immune if fall adequately described affidavit warrant." Gouled 255 298, 309, 261, 265, 65 647 (1921). prohibit traditionally despite For example, bar gambling gambling; note given temporarily bank teller robbery subsequently automobile robbery; prepared, sent, kidnaping blackmail prosecution. 19 find useful analogy deal "seizure" oral communications. explained, '(t)he designed prevent use process lips convict effects might him.' 88, 2183, 698, 1251. significant aspect apparent Hoffa 385 293, 408, 374 (1966), contention informant's conversation him, conversation, rationale elicited informant purpose gathering voluntarily. distinction one. each, communication, written, fact contemporaneous communication affect speak. 20 we permitting policies undergirding privilege. Murphy Waterfront Comm'n, 52, 55, 1594, 1596, (1964).8 21 time recorded subjected cruel trilemma self-accusation, perjury contempt." Ibid. Indeed, penalty sanction. convert our accusatorial system justice inquisitorial system. "The requirement specific charges, proof beyond reasonable doubt, confessions extorted whatever form pressures, right prompt hearing before magistrate, assistance counsel, supplied government circumstances make duty advise are characteristics manifestations demands." Watts Indiana, 338 49, 54, 69 1347, 1350, 1801 (1949). None attributes endangered "independently secured skillful investigation." Further, pose danger greater every "elicited inhumane treatment abuses." 1597. paper arrived them, treated discourteously Also, "good cause" "disturb," Ibid., independently determined warrants; bore burden executing chance self-deprecatory untrustworthy extracted already existence 22 recognize, course, protects privacy extent. However, suggested invasion privilege." 399, 1575. recently unless "compelled," outside protection, saying 'compelled self-incrimination, (the disclosure of) information.' 401, 1576. Here, manner. 23 Accordingly, hold individual's III turn next guaranteed descriptive so impermissible (1967).9 25 specificity concedes most models particularity, 28, warrant, exhaustive list App.A. 95-A. 96, 115. quoted language, argued, isolation without reference rest long appears. "properly," contends, permits crime. General prohibited "(T)he problem (posed warrant) intrusion Per general, exploratory rummaging belongings. (The addresses problem) 'particular description' things seized." Coolidge New Hampshire, 403 443, 467, 91 2022, 2038, 564 (1971). 'makes impossible prevents thing describing another. what taken, nothing left discretion officer warrant.' Stanford Texas, 379 476, 485, 85 506, 512, 431 (1965), 196, 76. 27 agree challenged 13T." Md.App., 167, A.2d, 103. sentence. Instead, appears lengthy 13T.10 think context term "crime" refers "other fruits" clause series follows colon word "Maryland." All clauses precedes colon, namely, "items 13, block T." 13T.11 admissibility light Hayden. Hayden should suppressed. His objection prove another charged help evidentiary basis charge, shows solely purpose. replies makes representation past existing knowledge falsity, obtains chattel, money, valuable security another, relies detriment. Polisher State, 555, 560, 276 102, 104 doubt. consequently argues demonstrate mistake 30 conviction. doing, consideration purposes required." conclude trained transaction. 31 acts absence mistake. Nye & Nissen 336 613, 766, (1949), scheme conduct, 32 showed presentation eleven invoices. conclusion 'for proving intent, motive, knowledge' defendants. Evidence offenses period tended consistent highly intent." 618, 769. informed arising out transactions. And, reading numerous complainants, interviewing become familiar method operation. relevance offense, apparent. features common. Both section subdivision; owned person; handled extensively Most important collateral. Unreleased evidenced trusts. lot, failure deliver encumbrances mere inadvertence. permitted satisfied requirements judgment ordered. 36 BRENNAN, dissenting. 37 concurring Term 414, 1582, I my view citizen testimonial matter tend comes zone "a inner sanctum feeling thought." 327, 615, (1973). material falling subpoena. holds today valid can meaningful seizing impermissibly general. dissent.1 38 petitioner." Ante, 471. cannot questioned protected 87-88, 2182-2183, squarely "(t)he proprietor practitioner more intimate life." retreats this. Though recognizing value 477, 'right "to enclave lead life," ' Ante., 476 declines, adequate explanation, include comprising physical extensions thoughts knowledge. noted Fisher, give effect ignores essential spirit Amendment: "(Business) least extension activities, though concededly aspects one's life. Where mental affairs complicated day age, seem away complexities keep records. Olmstead 277 438, 474, 564, 571, 944, 954 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)." 426-427, 1588 (Brennan, judgment). outset, today's assault narrowing respected it. sanctions circumvention indulging unjustified warrant. But protecting hollow guarantee expedient seizure. resolved simplistic notion compulsion. Search rife elements occurs State. resist authority. To sure, observes, "(p)etitioner about," 466, means suggest obstruct investigators' files.2 disappear merely door house, much resistance outsiders efforts same. refuse recognition and, generally, confine dominion mind compels unconstitutional denying freedom conducting affairs. True principle, enshrined carefully "actual bears relationship protections governmental compulsions crime," 333, "(w)e indeed attach importance possession, close intrusions forbids." 336, 20, 620. plainly actual order limitations, "situations arise constructive relinquishment temporary insignificant intact." 618.3 42 involved clearly avoids values submit mischaracterization "possibility principal's implicit explicit 'testimony' identified summons." 473 7. Whether possibility even strained operated personally accused. regard "possession closest forbidden Amendment," 331, 617, refuses Couch. 43 reflects line decisions explicitly "unable tantamount unreasonable several stemming seizures, established, assertion, 472, (1921), violation, illegality prerequisite violation. Under Gouled, exists "(accused) unwilling source evidence," 306, 264, depend Vel non seizure.4 44 Until today, decision few exceptions,5 indications strongly contrary.See, E. g., Lefkowitz, 285 452, 465-467, 420, 423-424, 76 877 (1932); Weeks 232 383, 341, 346, 58 (1914); (1906)6 More recently, 767, 1834, "values overlap helps protect," considering first inquiry nature, any, precludes 760-765, 1830-1832. Subsequent Schmerber, 1648, clothing "not 'testimonial' 'communicative' respondent Amendment."7 reflect root understanding 630, 532: "It breaking doors, drawers, constitutes essence offence (to Amendment); indefeasible security, liberty (A)ny forcible extortion ., condemnation Amendment). amendments run almost other." Even be, specially avoided belongings." Thus appearing face specify particularity place searched imposed "unauthorized invasions 'the privacies life' prevented. Berger York, 41, 58, 1873, 1883, 1040 (1967). 'As (1965) (quoting (1927). recites requirements, renders limitation unlawful empty promise. admittedly detailed further authorized construes sweeping authorization neither available executed how viewed hindsight, overwhelming quantity irrefutable generality warrants.8 attempt cure defect Post hoc judicial evades settled decisions. becomes assured point enforcing laws detached, neutral scrutiny ." Terry Ohio, 392 21, 1868, 1880, 889 1881; 333 10, 13-14, 68 367, 368-369, 92 436 (1948). function detached review whose unassailably far-reaching especially 47 MARSHALL, BRENNAN need consider alternative survive L.Edd so, argument case. executed, Unit received complaints gist took money sets purchasers assurances procure titles properties encumbrances. misappropriated promised. established invoked corporate 88-89, 2182-83, (1974); Grant 227 190, (1913); 70, 377, (1906). appears, really generated practice lawyer. Appendix Exhibits 1-3. recording taxes, abandoned submitted jury. Solicitor General, Amicus brief filed Court, forming upheld appeal, entirely sources Curiae 12-14, 24-25, 17. true, not, jurisdiction permit us apply discretionary concurrent-sentence doctrine, Benton 395 784, 791, 89 2056, 2060, 707 (1969), thereby decline Barnes 412 837, 848, 16, 2364, 380 appellate courts conflict Federal Courts over documentary obtainable Hill Philpott, 445 F.2d 144 (CA7), cert. denied, 404 991, 533, (1971), substantial majority position opposite view. Shaffer Wilson, 523 175 (CA10 1975), pending, 75-601; Murray, 492 178, 191 (CA9 1973); Taylor Minnesota, 466 1119 (CA8 1972), 956, 1425, 689 Blank, 459 383 (CA6), 887, 111, 143 (1972); Scharfman, 448 1352 (CA2 1971), 405 919, 789 Bennett, 888, 896 (CA2), denied Sub nom. Jessup 396 852, 90 113, 101 (1969). accords views Wigmore. J. Wigmore, 2264, p. (McNaughton Rev.1961). adopted Government consistently obtain "mere evidence" accused; seeking constituted rule overturned 301-302, 1647, "convergence theory" Amendments illustrated Agnello 269 4, 70 145 (1925), contraband incident arrest proceeding him. statement support itself supplies invocation Couch, "testimony" summons. risk many fundamental noble aspirations: unwillingness suspected contempt; preference rather justice; fear self-incriminating abuses; sense fair play dictates 'a state-individual balance alone until good shown disturbing contest shoulder entire load' ; inviolability human personality 'to distruct statements; realization privilege, sometimes shelter guilty,' innocent.' affidavits establish formally rights. contentions disposed summarily. two: affidavits, Aguilar 108, 1509, 723 reliability credibility informants; stale reason still possession. sources. complainants named, positions described, comprehensive fashion. special-agent affiants aver verified, part, complainants' examining correspondence reflecting transactions, Copies attached affidavits; detail. agents interviewed, positive results, persons object investigation. Rarely seen warrant-supporting complete thorough. probable-cause merit. Ventresca, 741, 684 (1965). argued three-month delay completion based, searches, lapse precluded belied facts prepared ordinary eminently expect maintained surely months complex scheme. release lienholder weeks lien remained released. this, considered demonstrating current concern amply supports belief retained sought-for final Bumper North Carolina, 391 543, 550 15, 1788, 1792, 797 (1968), relying justify searches. reject reasons. First, claim error grounds Appeals. Second, us, fails. referred discussed judge, deciding suppress, references far cry prosecution's assertion requires exalt formalism substance. following sale, purchase, T, subdivision, County, Maryland: "title notes, abstracts, rundowns; contracts and/or assignments Raffaele Antonelli Rocco Caniglia Corporation others; payoff pay-off noteholders; trustees trust; lenders instructions loan permanent loan; disbursement sheets memoranda; checks, check stubs ledger indicating settlement; disbursements fully releases, recorded; books, correspondence, showing tending Article Section 140, Annotated Code 1957 Edition, amended revised, together App. suggests disagree. piecing bits Like jigsaw puzzle, whole "picture" false-pretense placing proper pieces singly, comparatively little. complexity shield avoid detection demonstrated suspect's named contrasts sharply 58-59, eavesdropping statute "without committed; 'property' sought, conversations, described," invalidated. record discloses officials content, observe extent improperly correct returning suppressing others. grave dangers necessarily objects easily ascertainable. innocuous examined, cursorily, are, Similar dangers, telephone conversations. kinds responsible officials, take care assure manner minimizes unwarranted privacy. Today's doubtless trend eviscerate protections. See, Texas 67, 304, 209 (1975); (1976); Watson, 411, 820, 598 Santana, 38, 2406, 300 stand idly similarly extraction blood body. compulsion, yet Unlike here, limitations applicable. writing separately "(S)urely availability owner Government. If private, owner's nullify finding way hand agents. takes from, safety deposit box compelled, view, meaning Amendment." 337 n., 620 (concurring). Ante rendering 265. observation, hedged qualifications, proposition inapplicable papers. 263. cites exception, having Marron, little, foundation erring Rather, outfit equipment actually commit offense." 199, 77. Upon overruled (1932) ostensible effort Lefkowitz distinguish Notwithstanding. supporting violating fairly characterizable doubt utilizing contents wiretapping lend little position. Two expressly posed wiretapping. 56, 62, 1882, 1885, Osborn 323, 329 7, 429, 432, 394 conversations parties confidential circumstances. Grave questions raised, speak arm's length. invaded. 471-479, 570-572, 944 dissenting). component precluding rule, repudiated testimony, conceptually distinct once 466-467, reiterates Boyd'S Compulsory Extraction Production doctrinal demise untouched 420-422, 5, 1585-1586, (1976) observing "(t)his require evidential nature seizure," 303, least, open Testimony requested indicates occurred indiscriminately. 155, 156.

Category: 0