Document: 380 U.S. 693 85 S.Ct. 1246 14 L.Ed.2d 170 ONE 1958 PLYMOUTH SEDAN, Petitioner,v.COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. No. 294. Argued March 31, 1965. Decided April 29, Standord Shmukler, Philadelphia, Pa., (Louis Lipschitz, Jerold G. Klevit, and Lipschitz & Chalfin, with him on the brief), for petitioner. Thomas J. Shannon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harrisburg, respondent. Mr. Justice GOLDBERG delivered opinion of Court. 1 At approximately 6:30 a.m. December 16, 1960, two law enforcement officers Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board stationed near Camden, New Jersey, at approach to Benjamin Franklin Bridge, observed a Plymouth sedan bearing license plates proceeding toward bridge in direction Pennsylvania. The officers, noting that '(t)he car was low rear, quite low,' followed it across into Philadelphia. They stopped automobile short distance within city, identified themselves questioned owner, George McGonigle. then searched and, rear trunk, found 31 cases liquor not tax seals. were seized McGonigle arrested charged violation law.1 did have either search or arrest warrant. 2 Pursuant statute2 Commonwealth filed petition forfeiture automobile.3 hearing, McGonigle, by timely objection, sought dismissal ground depended upon admission evidence illegally obtained Fourth Amendment Constitution as applied States Fourteenth Amendment. trial court sustained this position dismissed petition. In doing so, judge made specific finding seizure founded obtained, since under particular circumstances acted without probable cause.'4 Superior Court Pennsylvania, an intermediate appellate court, 4-to-3 decision reversed order dismissing directed be forfeited. 199 Pa.Super. 428, 186 A.2d 52. Supreme affirmed Court, one dissenting. 414 Pa. 540, 201 427. 3 basis Court's exclusionary rule, which Mapp v. Ohio, 367 643, 657, 81 1684, 1693, 6 1081, held 'is essential part both Amendments,' applies only criminal prosecutions is applicable deemed civil nature. light disposition case, State review court's lack cause, stating: 4 'The thrust arguments, appellant Commonwealth, validity propriety subsequent automobile. our view, such arguments are beyond point. By reason nature present proceeding, i.e., procedure, we consider unnecessary determine automobile.' 542; A.2d, 429. 5 We granted certiorari, 379 927, 323, 13 340, important question whether constitutional rule enunciated Weeks United States, 232 383, 34 341, 58 L.Ed. 652, proceedings character involved here—a there has been conflict state federal decisions.5 For reasons set forth below, hold does apply consequently reverse judgment As acknowledged, leading case subject Boyd 116 616, 524, 29 746.' Carroll 267 132, 147, 45 280, 283, 69 543. See supra, 646—647, 1686—1687. 746, itself but forfeit 35 plate glass had allegedly imported payment customs duty. District Judge entered compelling owners produce certain record would aid proving its forfeiture. before compulsory production man's private papers their evidentiary use against his property alleged fraud revenue laws constituted unreasonable meaning Constitution. holding barred attempted seizure, Bradley, stated: 7 'We also clearly instituted purpose declaring offenses committed him, though they may form, criminal. very declared twelfth section act 1874, information based, consists acts public relation merchandise, statute; declared, offender shall fined exceeding $5,000, nor less than $50, imprisoned years, both; addition fine merchandise These penalties affixed acts, suit being them. If indictment presented claimants, conviction goods could included judgment. government prosecutor elects waive indictment, file claimants,—that is, form,—can he device take from aspect deprive claimants immunities citizens, extort them papers, or, alternative, confession guilt? This cannot be. information, technically substance effect one. * As, therefore, suits forfeitures incurred commission law, quasi nature, think all purposes fourth amendment constitution *.' 633—634, 534. 8 authoritative statement Government seize seem dispositive case. however, argues factually distinguishable subpoena whereas issue here admissibility already Government's possession. Although factual difference between bar, nevertheless basic equal, if greater, force us. situation evidence—in books records, results car—the obtaining violates relied sustain holds not. 9 further Boyd's unequivocal well undermined statements Jeffers, 342 48, 54, 72 93, 96, 96 59, Trupiano 334 699, 710, 68 1229, 1234—1235, 92 1663. Jeffers Trupiano, unlike Boyd, cases. prosecutions. admissible notwithstanding fact contraband. way dictum, point it, stated these ruling contraband excludable mean required return narcotics unregistered still, alcohol mash Trupiano. 10 explains Both concerned objects possession which, more, constitutes crime.6 repossession per se subjected penalties. frustrated express policy objects. 53 96. 11 It apparent here, termed different. There nothing even remotely possessing put subjects possible loss. And conceded establish illegal using resulting challenged having Furthermore, owner any frustrate concerning automobiles, automobiles. distinction what described derivative indeed recognized requirement mandatory liquor, stills, discretionary things automobiles used. Purdon's Pa.Stat.Ann., Tit. 47, § 6—602(e) (1964 Cum.Supp.). We, do us analogous can no impair continued like intrinsically character.7 12 Finally Bradley aptly pointed out quasi-criminal character. Its object, penalize offense law. driver automobile, laws. disclose committing.8 convicted involved, subject, first offender, minimum penalty $100 maximum $500 fine.9 loss time estimated value $1,000,10 higher amount proceeding. anomalous indeed, circumstances, excludable, while requiring determination violated, same admissible.11 That result greater punishment prosecution courts. One 1959 Chevrolet Impala Coupe, involving 1962, affirming exercise discretion following prosecution, 'It seemed below make man pay sum $500.00 fines, together costs storage cost sufficient circumstances. To coupe above entirely proportion crime involved. say abused so acting.' 145, 150, 191 717, 719. sum, conclude led obligatory Amendment, articulated Clark Mapp, support conclusion here. must reversed. Our frees remand officials cause previously necessary decide.12 15 remanded inconsistent opinion. 16 ordered. 17 Reversed remanded. 18 BLACK, concurring. 19 language forbids 'unreasonable searches seizures' expressly implication provide secured used accused. Congress could, course, pass preclude courts, I believe other power itself. Wolf People Colorado, 338 25, 39, 1359, 1367, 93 1782 (concurring opinion). agree because ourselves might practice manner 'shocks conscience' 'shabby' 'arbitrary,' commanded authorized prevent evidence. seems me amending Constitution, business people, interpreting But Fifth specifically 'No person compelled witness himself,' 634—635, 534—535, 'a forfeited himself, fifth constitution, equivalent seizure—and seizure—within amendment.' therefore stands principle evidence, Amendment's provision himself Rochin California, 165, 174, 205, 211, 183 thus based exclusion unlawfully squarely prohibitions Amendments, merely personal predilections judges use. 20 646, 1686, 'the amendments run almost each other.' U.S., 630, S.Ct., 532. outset quoted length Amendments forbid through seizure. Use said 'tantamount coerced testimony.' 656, 1692. last Term Malloy Hogan, 378 1, 8, 84 1489, 1494, 653: 21 'Mapp privilege self-incrimination implemented cases, guarantees security conjoined States. great 746 22 reliance doctrine unreasonably evidence—that joined Mapp. 661, 1694 today protection unlawful testimony follow recognize interpretation reached 'constitutional provisions should liberally construed.' 635, 535. interpretive principle, think, desirable given proper place Government. 23 expresses view correct free finding, standard courts note 9, infra, accompanying text. Surdon's Pa.Stat.Ann. 6—601 Cum.Supp.), provides pertinent part: rights exists malt brewed beverage manufactured possessed, equipment, material, utensil, vehicle, boat, vessel, animals aircraft manufacture transportation beverages, may, board, hereinafter provided.' A separate upheld court. No appeal taken order. unreported. Sedan, 427; Berkowitz 340 F.2d 168 (C.A.1st Cir.); $5,608.30 Coin Currency, 326 359 (C.A.7th $1,058.00 323 211 (C.A.3d Carey, 272 492 (C.A.5th 1956 Ford Tudor 253 725 (C.A.4th Physic, 175 (C.A.2d Butler, 156 897 (C.A.10th 1963 Cadillac Hardtop, 220 F.Supp. 841 (D.C.E.D.Wis.). Cleary Bolger, 371 392, 401, 403, 83 385, 390, 391, 390 See, Internal Revenue Code 1939, §§ 2803(a), 2810(a), Stat. 303, 308; 2553(a), 271; Narcotic Drugs Import Export Act, 42 596, U.S.C. 174 (1958 ed.). Nor impaired decisions Coupe Automobile, 321, 47 154, 71 279, Dodge 530, 191, 392. introduction statutory authority when later ratified official authority. Indeed 532, 192, Holmes, involve different ground. invading those infringed yet allowed used.' Under facts presumably violating more subsections 4—491: (2) transport purchased Store; (4) untaxed liquor; (11) importation Commonwealth. 4—494(a) Cum.Supp.) provides: 'Any who violate article, except otherwise provided, guilty misdemeanor thereof, sentenced hundred dollars ($100), five ($500), failure fine, imprisonment month, three months, offense, ($300), undergo period year.' National Market Reports, Inc., Red Book, Jan. 1—Feb. 14, 1961, Region A, 114. 638, 536, rejected argument technical rem right assert defense violations rights. '(A)lthough goods, rem, nominal party, nevertheless, substantial party suit; certainly after making claim defense; present, entitled privileges appertain prosecuted committing offense.' MR. JUSTICE CLARK Ker 374 23, 33, 1623, 726, Amendments.' Cf. Beck 89, 223, 142; Aguilar Texas, 108, 1509, 723; Henry 361 98, 80 168, 134; 153—154, 285,

Category: 0