Legal Document

392 U.S. 40 88 Supreme Court Reporter 1889 20 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 917 Nelson SIBRON, Appellant,v.STATE OF NEW YORK. John Francis PETERS, Appellant, versus STATE Nos. 63 and 74. Argued Dec. 11 12, 1967. Decided June 10, 1968. [Syllabus from pages 40-42 intentionally omitted] Kalman Finkel Gretchen White Oberman, New York City, for appellant, Sibron. William I. Siegel, Brooklyn N.Y., appellee. Michael Juviler, the Dist. Atty. of County, York, as amicus curiae. Robert Stuart Friedman, Peters. James Judge Duggan, Tuckahoe, Brooklyn, N.Y. Kings Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered opinion Court. 1 These are companion cases to Number 67, Terry Ohio, 1, 1868, 889, decided today. They present related questions under Fourth Fourteenth Amendments, but arise in context York's 'stop-and-frisk' law, N.Y.Code Crim.Proc. § 180—a. This statute provides: 2 '1. A police officer may stop any person abroad a public place whom he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed or about commit felony offenses specified section five hundred fifty-two this chapter, demand him his name, address an explanation actions. 3 '2. When stopped questioning pursuant that danger life limb, search such dangerous weapon. If finds weapon other thing possession which constitute crime, take keep it until completion questioning, at time shall either return it, if lawfully possessed, arrest person.' 4 The appellants, Sibron Peters, were both convicted crimes state courts on basis evidence seized their persons by officers. Appeals held was properly admitted, ground searches uncovered authorized statute. People Sibron, 18 N.Y.2d 603, 272 N.Y.S.2d 374, 219 North Eastern Reporter, 2nd 196 (1966) (memorandum); 238, 273 217, 595, (1966). Peters have appealed convictions Court, claiming 180—a unconstitutional its face construed applied, because seizures violated rights Amendment, made applicable Fourteenth. Mapp 367 643, 81 1684, 6 1081 (1961). We noted probable jurisdiction, 386 954, 87 1042, 101 (1967); 980, 1291, 228 (1967), consolidated two argument with 67. 5 facts these be stated briefly. appellant 63, unlawful heroin.1 He moved before trial suppress heroin arresting officer, Patrolman Anthony Martin. After court denied motion, pleaded guilty charge, preserving right appeal evidentiary ruling.2 At hearing motion suppress, Officer Martin testified while patrolling beat uniform March 9, 1965, observed 'continually hours 4:00 P.M. 12:00, midnight * vicinity 742 Broadway.' during period saw conversation six eight (Patrolman Martin) knew past experience narcotics addicts. did not overhear conversations, see anything pass between others. Late evening entered restaurant. speak three more known addicts inside Once again, nothing overheard seen sat down ordered pie coffee, and, eating approached told come outside. outside, said 'You know what & N Immigration Nationality Decisions am after.' According 'mumbled something reached into pocket.' Simultaneously, thrust hand same pocket, discovering several glassine envelopes, which, turned out, contained heroin. State had some difficulty settling upon theory admissibility envelopes In sworn complaint stated: 7 'As defendant, latter being direction seeing him, put left jacket pocket pulled out tinfoil envelope attempt throw ground. never losing sight def(endan)t's hand, examined found contain ten glascine (sic) white substance alleged Heroin.' 8 version encounter, however, bears very little resemblance Martin's testimony suppress. fact, discarded abandonment hearing.3 Nor ever seriously suggest fear bodily harm searched self-protection find weapons.4 9 prosecutor's cause believe conversing number over eight-hour period. absence knowledge part concerning nature intercourse addicts, inclined grant As judge stated, 'All knows unknown men: might been talking World Series. prize fights.' prosecutor, reminded admitted stand, absence, narcotics. Thereupon, changed mind ruled arrest. 10 Section 180—a, statute, mentioned point court. Appellate Term affirmed conviction without opinion. Sibron's case case, justified wrote no case. dissents Judges Fuld Van Voorhis, indicate rested holding rate, Brief Opposition Jurisdictional Statement sought justify we District Attorney County confessed error. 74, possessing burglary tools circumstances evincing intent employ them commission crime.5 arrest, like pretrial them. too guilty, appeal. Samuel Lasky City Police Department home apartment Mount Vernon, p.m. July 1964. just finished taking shower drying himself when heard noise door. His investigate interrupted telephone call, returned looked through peephole hall, 'two men tiptoeing alcove toward stairway.' immediately called police, civilian clothes armed service revolver. Returning peephole, 'a tall man away followed shorter man, lived 120-unit building 12 years recognize tenants. Believing happened course attempted burglary,6 opened door, hallway slammed door loudly behind him. precipitated flight stairs men,7 gave chase. located sixth floor, apprehended fourth fifth floors. Grabbing collar, continued another unsuccessful pursuit man. explained presence saying visiting girl friend. However, declined reveal friend's she married woman. patted weapons, discovered hard object pocket. feel gun, knife. removed Peters' It opaque plastic envelope, containing burglar's tools. explicitly refused credit merely visit requisite 'reasonable suspicion' question also response 'clearly unsatisfactory,' 'under Lasky's action frisking reasonable, even though armed.' 'public place' within meaning Division affirmed, essentially adopting reasoning judge, Voorhis dissenting separately. 13 outset must deal whether jurisdiction 63. asserted completed six-month sentence imposed result conviction, become moot St. Pierre States, 319 41, 910, L.Ed. 1199 (1943).8 concluded moot. 14 first place, clear broad dictum commenced discussion Pierre—that 'the because, after petitioner's expiration, there longer subject matter judgment could operate' (319 U.S., 42, S.Ct., 911)—fails account significant qualifications recognized developed later cases. Only few days ago unanimously writ habeas corpus available test constitutionality where petitioner custody applied writ, released adjudicate claims. Carafas LaVallee, 391 234, 1556, 554 (1968). On numerous occasions proceeded merits criminal fully served probationary suspended reimposed terminated. Ginsberg 390 629, 1274, 195 (1968); Pollard 352 354, 77 481, 393 (1957); Morgan, 346 502, 74 247, 98 248 (1954); Fiswick 329 211, 67 224, 91 (1946). Thus mere release prisoner does mechanically foreclose consideration 15 itself possible exceptions 'doctrine' mootness, appear us here. '(i)t brought review expiration sentence,' noting contempt controversy Government continuing one, good chance would 'ample opportunity review' important presented future proceeding. 43, 911. plain recognition vital importance keeping open avenues judicial deprivations constitutional right.9 There way bring here expired. By precluded obtaining bail pending appeal,10 virtue inevitable delays system, less than month newly appointed appellate counsel supplied copy transcript roughly months physically tier system.11 true despite fact took all steps perfect prompt, diligent, timely manner. 16 Many deep abiding problems encountered primarily level 'low visibility' process prosecutions 'minor' carry only short sentences.12 do Constitution contemplates people deprived should utterly remediless defenseless against repetitions conduct. cut off federal whole classes simple expedient blanket denial clearly recognized, effectively deny convict access then argue mooted failure alone prevented doing.13 17 second exception permits adjudication law further penalties disabilities can satisfied.' Subsequent expanded realistically inroads principle itself. implied burden show existence collateral legal consequences. Three (1946), prisoner, convict, alien, deportation having crime 'moral turpitude'—even (and hold) fell category. pointed decide wanted American citizen, proving 'good moral character.' Id., 222, 230.14 next dealt problem consequences (1954). probably subjected higher recidivist old attack. But dissent indication increment invalidation id., 516, n. 4, 255, chose rest broader view matter. Without canvassing Morgan alluding specifically sentence, 19 'Although term served, results persist. heavier penalties, civil affected. power remedy invalid exists, think, respondent entitled invalid.' 512—513, 253. later, (1957), abandoned inquiry actual specific effect presumed they existed. With citations Fiswick, statement 'convictions entail disadvantages future,' 358, 484, '(t)he possibility imposition sufficiently substantial our dealing merits.' Ibid. thus acknowledged obvious most adverse consequences.15 'possibility' will enough preserve ending 'ignominiously limbo mootness.' Parker Ellis, 362 574, 577, 80 909, 911, 963 (1960) (dissenting opinion). 21 certainly meets survival. pausing canvass possibilities detail, note expressly provides used impeach character choose issue trial, Code 393—c, submitted sentencing again 482. doubtless Moreover, relevance multiple offender. offender, 503—504, 248—249, so Pollard, 355—357, 482—483. jury faced character, forgive least discount limited minor transgressions, particularly occurred relatively distant past.16 impossible say man's record renders reputation irredeemable.17 And believed individual point, interest beginning redemption particular adjudicated. cannot foretell opportunities themselves removal individual's record. validity many contexts, compare Burgett Texas, 389 109, 258, sooner litigated better concerned. always preferable litigate directly principally dispute, rather proceeding central controversy. litigation conducted dispute fresh additional may, necessary, taken risk witnesses die memories fade. far eliminate source potential disability require citizen suffer possibly unjustified indefinite secure State's impose action. Cf. Peyton Rowe, 54, 64, 1549, 1554, 426 (1968).18 22 None concededly imperative policies rule entertaining controversies dismissal abstract, feigned, hypothetical suggestion wanting diligence fervor litigation. contested historical facts, reflects 'impact actuality'19 greater degree accepted Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 KF62 2201. 23 supra, read light mean shown challenged conviction. That 'has stake survives satisfaction him.' 230. II. 24 confession error Confessions are, course, given great weight, 'relieve performance function.' Young 315 257, 62 510, 511, 86 832 (1942). practice conduct own examination confesses erroneously obtained. For one thing, Young, 'our judgments precedents, proper administration stipulation parties.' 259, 511. See Marino Ragen, 332 561, 68 240, 92 170 (1947). special weight where, highest interpreting grounds. need authoritative declarations sensitive contexts reason development abstention doctrine See, e.g., Railroad Texas Pullman Co., 312 496, 61 85 971 (1941). Such final product sovereign deserving respectful treatment behalf entire executive branches made, official, elected political subdivision State. seems late rights. accept blindly circumstances, majority expressed contrary view, disservice abdication obligation lower grounds manner conform behavior demands Constitution. turn merits. III. 25 parties sides urged principal 'on face.' decline, drawn abstract unproductive exercise laying extraordinarily elastic categories Amendment effort determine sense compatible. warrantless pre-eminently sort concrete factual respect quite different adequacy procedural safeguards written purports authorize issuance warrants certain circumstances. Berger 388 1873, 1040 (1967). No required warrant valid procedure inadequate ensure neutral contemplation magistrate proposed scope, lies heart Amendment. E.g., Aguilar 378 108, 84 1509, 723 (1964); Giordenello 357 480, 78 1245, 1503 (1958). last 813—a, established permit electronic eavesdropping, failed embody demanded Amendments. 26 unlike deals substantive types warrants. officers 'stop' people, 'demand' explanations 'search (them) weapon(s)' engaged activity represent policeman. operative susceptible wide variety interpretations.20 is, free develop seizure meet needs local enforcement, Ker California, 374 23, 34, 83 1623, 1630, 726 (1963), call standards employs names choose. not, trenches rights, regardless labels attaches state-approved 'is (or seizure) law. reasonable Just unreasonable amendment, constitutionally one.' Cooper 58, 61, 788, 790, 730 27 Accordingly, make pronouncement facial peculiar sort, 'not much language employed authorizes.' 245, 599 today judged Reasonable Search Seizure Clause clause differ sharply set up 180 a. Our furthered pronounce words confine instead reasonableness underlie convictions. IV. Turning inadmissible prosecution notion accosted restaurant, outside acquainted information hours. emphasized completely ignorant regarding content So knew, indeed 'have Series.' inference who talk traffic simply support intrusion personal security. Nothing resembling existed axiomatic incident precede serve justification. Henry 361 98, 168, 134 (1959); Johnson 333 16—17, 367, 370, 436 (1948). lawful 29 lacked still dangerous. 889. 'seizure' restaurant antecedent physical accompanied search. unclear transpired totally barren submission force authority choice, went voluntarily spirit apparent cooperation officer's investigation. event, deficiency immaterial, since obtained new interval initiation encounter 30 Although viewed self-protective weapons authorizes 'reasonably limb.' has, field interrogation answer propounded policeman bullet; exposure great.' Rivera, 441, 446, 252 458, 463, 201 32, 35 (1964), cert. denied, 379 978, 679, 568 (1965). application proves much. seize every sees street makes inquiries. Before places anything, adequate, doing so. able inferred supra. reveals facts. suspect's act gives rise limb justifies committing crime. urge feared going acted self-defense. opening Sibron—'You after'—made abundantly narcotics, doubt thought pocket.21 31 Even assuming arguende adequate scope unrelated justification render inadmissible. approved consisted solely patting outer clothing suspect concealed objects instruments assault. hands pockets searched. initial exploration arms, shows looking accomplishment goal conceivably inception—the protection disarming potentially violates guarantee protects sanctity intrusions government agents. V. 32 think equally wholly 'abroad place,' suspicious activities once suspected gun point. purposes caught stairway floors building, burglary. strange noises apparently led someone entry. investigated men, furtively hallway. maneuvers dressed hurriedly. hallway, fled stairs. difficult conceive stronger eyewitness observation activity. recognized,22 deliberately furtive actions approach strangers strong indicia mens rea, coupled relating factors considered decision Brinegar 338 160, 69 1302, 93 1879 (1949); Husty 282 694, 51 75 629 (1931); 103, 171—172, (1959). 33 precisely when, each place. Rios 364 253, 261—262, 1431, 1436—1437, 1688 (1960). inconclusive 'arrested' had, justification, already commenced. grabbed abruptly 'seized' curtailed freedom movement 171 172. obviously 'by things assault escape, well prevent destruction crime.' Preston 376 364, 881, 883, 777 (1964). purposes. engage unrestrained thorough-going effects. flight, weapons. While clothing, instrument 34 comports commands affirmed. reversed, unconstitutionally appellant. ordered. 36 Conviction reversed. 37 DOUGLAS, concurring. 38 resided multiple-dwelling house York. floor. afternoon, stepped phone rang answered call. hanging up, stairway. phoned headquarters report occurrence, back alcove, came apartment, chase, began run floors, asked building. Appellant replied friend, give her 'frisked' weapon, pants envelope. tension bar, picks Allen wrenches leg filed screwdriver edge. subsequently 39 hold kind burglarly housebreaking mission.* my accordingly WHITE, 41 join Parts I—IV Court's affirmance reach, frisk concurring 1886, 'discovered weapon.' Ante, package those evidence. 42 FORTAS, 43 1. construe (1943), cases, appears (Cf. opinion, ante, 58—59.) 44 2. qualification determining situations constitutional. reserve purporting extreme concluding face,' To extent contrary, disagree. 59—62.) 45 3. (No. 63), conclude pertinent principles disregard County. discourage confessions nor pt. II, 1900.) 46 HARLAN, result. 47 agree consonant dictated reasons understand, Terry. particular, serious afforded 48 entirely correct stop-and-frisk face: plainly purport policemen. 'constitutional face' expression means now fall terms ipso facto, limits well. federal, receives imprimatur 49 mean, ignored deliberate complex on-the-street work. giving carte blanche verbal formulation, should, relevant, successful. core permission Under premised suspicion cause, hence formulation 'reasonable' statutory sense. momentary indicated occur stop, raise question.1 50 premises outset, sufficient moot, reversed considerable confusion surrounded 'search' 'frisk' recovery me irrelevant repudiated statement, 'abandonment,' 45—46. theories adopted, forcible frisk, comparable Terry, requires 52 Since carrying says, neither. conversations done nothing, surveillance, 'probable' engaging transactions acquaintances. 53 Terry-type accept, general formula, requirement suspect' stops felony.' 'On stringent Terry: 'where observes unusual leads afoot *.' 30, 1884. interpretation courts, standard 54 standard. although association criminals factor contributing suspiciousness itself, create stop. surroundings affirmatively suggests activity, completed, current, intended. palpably continuous hours, piece pie, single word associated. surveillance suspicion. 55 Furthermore, violent assert order it. Here incipient stayed hand; indeed, intrude moment four earlier, situation later. hard-and-fast drawn, factor, missing here, immediate 56 forcibly consequence, essential premise lacking. Page 31, 1885. therefore unnecessary reach troublesome questions. First, that, automatic whose creates likelihood armed, falls offense apprehension safety, unless Second, proper, resolve exceeded bounds. 57 upheld, strongly fundamentally approach. holds recovered hink close Indeed, why rationale necessary devote interrogation. latest exceedingly small indicating suffices cause. While, influence tactics 'in field' necessarily limited, hundreds magistrates real full large. 58 o'clock afternoon apartment. testify, conclude, 'led entry.' 66. recognize, surely occurrence large One appeared tip-toeing. testify tip-toeing behaving 'furtively.' ran them, hand. 'flight,' 66, approach,2 guncarrying stranger (Lasky uniform) hardly indicative rea. 59 Probable prudent (such magistrate, hypothetical) believing crime.3 extrinsic committed, depends statements observations men. Apart conclusory burglars, offered escape neighborhood, arrest.4 60 upholding points lead confusion. concerns 'moment arrest.' escalating perhaps friendly imprisonment, developing identify i.e., permitted proceed moment-of-arrest premises, involved case: preceded implies, enough, developed, early false problem. Of fruits incident, prior person, met total burden. defendant validly say, afterwards.' demonstrated curtailment 'arrest' requiring time, immediately. Hence undoubtedly date chooses following 'Officer effects.' search,5 assume observation. matter, articulable somewhat affirm forced Unlike depend committed. An anyone for. 64 quickly all, above, required, acting objectively alternative courses Perhaps important, experienced officer. 'probable cause' depended persuade man,' judging encounters trained instinctive operating multitude gestures reconstruct. 'he burglar me' adds affidavit obtain warrant. action, looms larger. disbelieve (who cross-examination), believes supporting fire reasonable. 65 Given crediting watched did, suspicion.' permited protect use contraband appears. 66 foregoing concur BLACK, dissenting. reversal violating anti-narcotics police. reverses violation Ohio violate injure others both, And, time. Because differnt emphasis restate About Broadway. From remained there. During Later, o'clock, patrolman out. mumbled coat 'thought (Sibron) been' reaching gun. 70 Counsel confess error—that rearch But, reasons, 71 First. This, according search, 'affirmed limb." approaching opinions split second; delay death addict shoot stab, moves hurriedly habitually carried, behooves wants live did. get enforcement Nation gained helpless self defense associating intimately continuously meeting shifts constantly carried. 72 appraising realize chosen draw inferences mine below. illustration draws 'plain time.' 47, 4. hardly, distance atmosphere position overturn independent finding unspoken 'premise' inner thoughts. 73 findings rejecting sitting marble halls Building Washington, D.C., cautious. Due 1081, due literally thousands raising setting ourselves meticulously task endless rue day decided. wise extravagant egregious errors. fantastic leave holdings alone. base heroin, charge laws. previously argued, was, ample fashion Since, therefore, admissible affirm. N.Y.Pub. Health Law, McKinney's Unconsol.Laws, chapter 45, 3305, unauthorized narcotic drug unlawful, §§ 1751 1751—a N.Y.Penal Law 1909, effect, grade amount drugs defendant. originally charged felony, granted reduce Laboratory misdemeanor charge.' sentenced jail. 813—c denying 'may reviewed notwithstanding predicated plea guilty.' times remove questioned point: 'Q. Would you handed packets you? Is drop packets? 'A. intentions were. pushed 'MR. JOSEPH (Prosecutor): You intercepted it; didn't you, Officer? 'THE WITNESS: Yes.' (Emphasis added.) highly unlikely facing quarters, tried hope responsibility never, record, resistance, posed safety discussed mention leading counsel, so, opposition action; N.Y.Pen.Law 408 offenders 'been section. leaving 'told Sergeant desk burglars floor.' emerged 'I them.' Assistant Attorney, 'fleeing building.' them: 'We laboring aspect legitimately normal tip-toe hall unidentified girl-friend, tenant, rapidly descend elevators.' mootness oral argument, revealed released. argued hinted Court—where below merit review—or brief merits—in conceded aberrant impair Following moreover, amplified views added extraordinary ignore Normally consider foreclosing party issue; goes adjudicate, undertaken Fay Noia, 372 391, 424, 822, 841, 837 (1963): '(C)onventional notions finality defeat manifest policy liberty fullest plenary review.' 555 subd. arrested unable indigency. jail (with credit) 1965. April 23. forma pauperis May 14, assigned provided 11. recessed September. intermediate 1966, anniversary release. Cf., Thompson Louisville, 199, 624, 654 apply stay supersedeas.' availed long hear supersedeas purely ancillary connection actually taken. Ex parte Balston, 119 613, 317, 506 (1887); Sup.Ct.Rule 18; R. Robertson KF105 F3 Kirkham, Jurisdiction 435, 883 (R. Wolfson Pacific KF135 P2 Kurland ed., 1951). outstanding rendered Criminal Kings. judgment, 'highest had,' 1257, interference orderly processes courts. issued. bailable, 3144; distinguishable 'could sentence.' Compare 633, 1277, 195, (1968), Commissioner Buildings Town Hempstead, discretion' revoke license luncheonette selling inoffensive 'girlie' magazines 16-year-old boy mootness. generally Note, Va.L.Rev. 403 how crimes, rendered. 1955 1957 convictions, none alluded to. distinction impairment credibility, referred Pierre, authorization 'character' legislature. relevant 221—222, 229 230, Frankfurter, Note Advisory Opinions, Harv.L.Rev. 1002, 1006 (1924). 592 593, 919—920, apparent, example, entails 'detain' investigation durational limitations detention contemplated. statute's compulsion indicates 'stops' 'seizures,' analyzed rubric based infra, 180—a's category inappropriate neither presents elastic, passed recently involving intersections guarantees. tell, 'explanation actions' event refusal answer, 'custodial.' Miranda Arizona, 384 436, 1602, 694 indications weapon' encompass considerably 65-66. Taggart, 335, 283 581 searching permissible rises Finally, tell connotes specificity, reliability, objectivity touchstone governmental upheld suspicion,' whereas possessed protected overturned measure Martin, true, noted, approval view. court, fact. adopted tipped scales original stand spoke admission understand discovery forth himself. re-direct raised reference hearing, swiftly dropped. unarticulated 'finding' invasion comported himself, controlling deference. 7, N.Y.Pen.Code 140.20, 140.25 thoughtful study points, ALI Model Pre-Arraignment Procedure, Tentative Draft 2.01, 2.02, commentary sections appearing 105. states, attributed attribution unwarranted Beck 89, 223, 142; 1688; 134. Henry, 100, 170, 3052 'states standard' arrests FBI agents 'make presence, cognizable laws 726, parallel 134, 'far issuing warrant.' Agents theft whisky interstate shipment, neighborhood.' Petitioner driving alley, picking packages, away. impressive. Rabinowitz, 339 56, 430, 94 653.

Classification Label: 0