Document: 466 U.S. 727 104 S.Ct. 2085 80 L.Ed.2d 721 MASSACHUSETTSv.George UPTON. No. 83-1338. Supreme Court of the United States May 14, 1984. PER CURIAM. 1 Last Term, in Illinois v. Gates, 462 213, 103 2317, 76 527 (1983), we held that Fourth Amendment's requirement probable cause for issuance a warrant is to be applied, not according fixed and rigid formula, but rather light "totality circumstances" made known magistrate. We also emphasized task reviewing court conduct de novo determination cause, only determine whether there substantial evidence record supporting magistrate's decision issue warrant. In this case, Judicial Massachusetts, interpreting probable-cause Amendment Constitution, continued rely on approach set forth cases such as Aguilar Texas, 378 108, 84 1509, 12 723 (1964), Spinelli States, 393 410, 89 584, 21 637 (1969). 390 Mass. 562, 458 N.E.2d 717 (1983). Since was rejected grant petition certiorari case reverse judgment Court. 2 At noon September 11, 1980, Lieutenant Beland Yarmouth Police Department assisted execution search motel room reserved by one Richard Kelleher at Snug Harbor Motel West Yarmouth. The produced several items identification, including credit cards, belonging two persons whose homes had recently been burglarized. Other taken burglaries, jewelry, silver, gold, were found motel. 3 3:20 p.m. same day, received call from an unidentified female who told him "a motor home full stolen stuff" parked behind #5 Jefferson Ave., respondent George Upton his mother. She stated included gold. As out Beland's affidavit support warrant: 4 "She further going move any time now because fact Ricky Kelleher's raided [Upton] purchased these Kelleher. This she seen refused identify herself 'he'll kill me,' referring Upton. I then knew was, giving her name Lynn Alberico, met 16, Upton's repair shop off Summer St., Yarmouthport. identified me being girlfriend, Alberico. admitted girl named, stating surprised was. she'd broken up with wanted burn him. wouldn't give address or phone number would contact future, if need be." See Commonwealth Upton, Mass., 564 n. 2, N.E.2d, 718, 2. 5 Following call, went house verify property. Then, while other officers watched premises, prepared application warrant, setting all information noted above accompanying affidavit. He attached police reports prior along lists A Magistrate issued subsequent described caller incriminating evidence. discovered led conviction multiple counts burglary, receiving property, related crimes. 6 On appeal Court, argued supported sufficient showing "probable cause" under Amendment. With respect our Gates opinion, said: 7 "It clear opinion has announced significant change appropriate treatment applications warrants. Looking what did facts before it, rejecting expansive view certain general statements essential decision, conclude deals principally corroboration informant's tip, adequate itself, will meet standards." 568, 720. 8 Prior understood many courts require strict satisfaction "two-pronged test" whenever relies tip. It thought affidavit, first, must establish "basis knowledge" informant particular means which he came given report; and, second, it provide establishing either "veracity" specific "reliability" report case. Massachusetts apparently viewed merely adding new wrinkle two-pronged test: where veracity and/or basis knowledge are sufficiently clear, tip may save otherwise invalid 9 "We do decreeing standardless 'totality circumstances' test. still important but, adequately corroborated, they elements indispensible [sic] finding cause. seems that, so strong satisfy absence 'veracity' direct statement 'basis [his] knowledge.' " 721. 10 Turning reasoned, "forcefully apparent" Id., 569, Although home, specifically state saw them home. Second, concluded "[n]one common bases determining credibility reliability present here." Ibid. "tried true" informant, against penal interest, "ordinary citizen" providing witness crime. anonymous unverified assent suggestion Alberico does take category." 570, 722. 11 Finally, felt insufficient make its failure tended corroborate story supposed be, raid took place three hours earlier, girlfriend. But, much reviewed reasoned each item corroborative innocent, nonsuspicious event public. To sustain concluded, more needed. therefore violated Constitution reversed respondent's convictions. think misunderstood Gates. refine qualify test." hypertechnical divorced "the factual practical considerations everyday life reasonable prudent men, legal technicians, act." Brinegar 338 160, 175, 69 1302, 1310, 93 L.Ed. 1879 (1949). Our score explicit. "[W]e wiser abandon 'two-pronged test' established decisions Spinelli. reaffirm totality-of-the-circumstances analysis traditionally informed determinations." U.S., 238, S.Ct., 2332. "totality-of-the-circumstances" keeping "practical, common-sense decision" demanded 13 encouraged excessively technical dissection informants' tips, undue attention focused isolated issues cannot sensibly presented magistrate." 234, 2330 (footnote omitted). This, think, error consider entirety, significance relevant piece balancing relative weights various indicia (and unreliability) attending Instead, insisted judging bits pieces isolation artificial standards provided 14 erred failing deference Instead deciding whole "substantial basis" Magistrate's conducted determination. just after-the-fact, scrutiny 236, 2331. "A grudging negative attitude toward warrants," Ventresca, 380 102, 85 741, 746, 684 (1965), inconsistent both desire encourage use process recognition once obtained, intrusion upon interests protected less severe than supra, 237 10, 2331 10.* deferential standard review preference searches pursuant 15 Examined provides No single conclusive. But fit neatly together viewed, fair probability contraband crime" claimed have goods gave description tallied recent burglaries. room—which connected those burglaries—and explained connection between And motive attempt anonymity—fear retaliation—and furnishing information—her breakup "to him." 16 dismissed identification mere "unconfirmed guess." 6, 721, 6. demand certainty associate formal trials." 2336. "admitted was." course possible adopted convenient cover true identity." caller's admission, obvious how explanation calling, inference appears stronger uninformed unconfirmed guess. enough conformed making total 17 concluding can hardly accused approving "hunch" bare recital conclusions. surrounding possessed internal coherence weight whole. Accordingly, contained Magistrate. "Although easy when demonstrates existence resolution doubtful marginal area should largely determined accorded warrants." 109, 746. 18 reversed, remanded proceedings opinion. 19 ordered. 20 Justice BRENNAN MARSHALL dissent summary disposition deny certiorari. STEVENS, concurring judgment. 22 my reflects fundamental character corrects today. rested without telling us valid matter law.1 thereby increased own burdens well ours. For returns court, again decide violation constitutional protection unreasonable seizures occurred. If place, court's first Court's naught.2 no occurred, second proceeding could avoided ruling effect year ago. 23 statute surely State necessity federal question. see reason why followed sequence arguable disclosed record. Oregon stated: 24 "The proper analyze state's law, reaching claim. required, sake parochialism style, right claim fully law." Sterling Cupp, 290 Ore. 611, 614, 625 P.2d 123, 126 (1981).3 25 maintenance balance respective jurisdictions always difficult task. years concerned regarded encroachment into territory judges. See, e.g., Michigan Long, 463 1032, 3469, 77 1201 (1983) (STEVENS, J., dissenting); South Dakota Neville, 459 553, 566, 916, 924, 74 748 Minnesota Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 456, 477-489, 101 715, 730-737, 66 659 (1981) Idaho Employment Smith, 434 100, 103-105, 98 327, 329-330, 54 324 (1977) dissenting part). is, however, two-way street. judges unnecessarily invite undertake state-court judgments. believe unwisely invited Its regard misconception heritage courts. 26 Bill Rights proposed Federal Constitutional Convention 1787 major objection Convention's proposal. Papers Thomas 438 (Boyd ed. 1955). defense plan Alexander Hamilton enumeration rights unnecessary, surrendered people their limited powers Government, "would even dangerous" ground enumerating "plausible pretense" Government granted derogation people's rights. Federalist 84, pp. 573, 574 (Ford 1898) (A. Hamilton). latter argument troubled First Congress during deliberations Rights, solution became Ninth Annals 439 (1789) (remarks Rep. Madison). 27 provides: rights, shall construed disparage others retained people." extent applicable Fourteenth Amendment, principle embodied well. said, states truism. truism goes very core relationship individual governmental authority, indeed, sovereigns exercising authority over individual. 28 view, below lost sight truism, permitted Art. Declaration Rights. role confers Massachusetts; system federalism, that. perform function, instead strained rest grounds. 29 Whatever protections confer disparaged refuses adjudicate States. conferred exceed indeed court. majority logical conclusion, "appears basis, term 'cause' art. differently 'probable cause' Amendment." 580, 717, question," "is guarantee broader counterpart interpreted question applies hand. answer turn law. State's law prove protective protective. go assuming raised." Linde, E Pluribus—Constitutional Theory Courts, Ga.L.Rev. 165, 179 (1984). 30 remembered century Nation's history, solely relation authorities. Constitutions liberties abuse authorities ultimate guardian system, remain primary liberty people. believe, ignored premise government. doing so, ill-advised entry domain. 31 concur * "If affidavits submitted subjected type some deemed appropriate, might resort warrantless searches, hope relying consent exception Warrant Clause develop search. addition, possession conducting arrest greatly reduces perception unlawful intrusive conduct, assuring 'the property searched seized lawful executing officer, search, limits power search.' Chadwick, 433 1, [97 2476, 2482, 53 538] (1977)." Indeed, pointedly provisions stated, part: correctly relaxed compel try hand definition 14. misassessed consequences proves unacceptably shapeless permissive, define guaranteed protections." 573-574, 724 Cf. Opperman, 428 364, 96 3092, 49 1000 (1976) (rev'g S.D. 25, 228 N.W.2d 152), remand, 247 673 (judgment reinstated grounds); 312 (1981)), 346 425 (1984) part grounds). Kennedy, 295 260, 666 1316 cited therein, id., 262, P.2d, 1318; Hewitt Accident Ins. Fund Corp., 294 33, 41-42, 653 970, 975 (1982).

Category: 0