Legal Document

391 U.S. 585 88 Supreme Court Reporter 1755 20 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 828 Johnny SABBATH, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. Number 898. Argued May 2, 1968. Decided June 3, Murray or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Bring, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. John S. Martin, Jr., respondent. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The issue in this case is whether petitioner's arrest was invalid because federal officers opened closed but unlocked door apartment and entered order to him without first announcing their identity purpose. We hold that method entry vitiated therefore evidence seized subsequent search incident thereto should not have been admitted at trial. 2 On February 19, 1966, one William Jones detained border between California Mexico by customs agents, who found his possession ounce cocaine. After some questioning, told agents he had given narcotics Tijuana, Mexico, a person named 'Johnny,' whom accompanied there from Los Angeles. He said transport 'Johnny' latter city. 3 Also Jones' card on which written name Angeles telephone number. following day about p.m., made call number listed card; agent dialed number, with permission, listened ensuing conversation. A male voice answered call, addressed man as 'Johnny.' San Diego, still 'his thing.' asked if 'any trouble getting through line.' replied not. inquired planned remain home, upon receiving an affirmative answer, indicated way Angeles, would go man's apartment. 4 At 7:30 evening, went building returned cocaine they him, placed small broadcasting device him. waited outside building, listening apparatus. knocked door; woman answered. in, wait minute. Steps were heard then something 'getting Because noise phonograph apartment, reception poor, did hear word 'package.' 5 five ten minutes, proceeded door. One knocked, few seconds, and, no response, door, gun drawn. Other followed, least also They saw petitioner sitting couch, process withdrawing hand under adjacent cushion. placing arrest, package cushion, subsequently other items (e.g., pieces tin foil) apartment; testified trial adapted packaging narcotics. 6 Petitioner indicted knowingly importing into country concealing it, violation § Narcotic Drugs Import Export Act, amended, 35 Statutes-at-Large 614, 21 Code KF62 §§ 173 174. tried alone. evidence, over objection. appeal, conviction, Appeals Ninth Circuit ruled officers, effecting opening 'break open' within meaning 18 3109 required statute make prior announcement 'authority purpose.' 380 Federal Reporter, 2nd 108. granted certiorari, 389 1003, 570, 19 598 (1967), consider somewhat uncomplicated nonetheless significant agents' consonant law.1 it not, reverse. 7 here involved, 3109,2 deals dwelling terms only regard execution warrant. This has held, however, validity such officer effect warrant 'must be tested criteria identical those embodied in' statute. Miller versus States, 357 301, 306, 78 1190, 1194, 1332 (1958); Wong Sun 371 471, 482—484, 83 407, 414—415, 9 441 (1963).3 agree parties court below we must look controlling. 8 In supra, common-law background extensively examined.4 condluded, id., 313, 1198: 'The requirement notice authority purpose before forcing home deeply rooted our heritage grudging application. Congress, codifying tradition embedded Anglo-American law, declared reverence law individual's right privacy house.' 10 It noted, n. 12, 1197, 1198, another facet rule was, generally, safeguard might mistaken, unannounced intrustion someone there. See McDonald 335 451, 460 461, 69 191, 195—196, 93 L.Ed. 153 (concurring opinion). 11 Considering purposes 3109, indeed 'grudging application' hold, Government urges, use 'force' indispensable element To sure, uses phrase connotes force. But linguistic analysis seldom adequate when designed incorporate fundamental values ongoing development common law.5 Thus, recently interpreted codified state relevant apply police People Rosales, 68 Cal.2d 299, 437 Pacific 489 (1968). And held applies entries effected passkey,6 requires more force than does turning doorknob. An intrusion dwelling—what basically proscribes—is less break down open chain lock partially locked passkey, or, here, door.7 protection afforded by, inherent 'governed fortuitous circumstance door.' Keiningham 109 U.S.App.D.C. 272, 276, 287 126, 130 (1960). 12 seeks invoke exception announcement, contending lack compliance excused endangered informant themselves. See, e.g., Gilbert 366 923, 931 (C.A.9th Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 388 922, 87 2123, 1370 (1967); cf. Ker State California, 374 23, 39—40, 1623, 1632—1633, 726 (1963) (opinion Clark, J.); 47, 1636 BRENNAN, J.). However, 'exigent circumstances,' 309, 1195, excuse 3109,8 record reveal any substantial basis excusing failure announce assuming armed resist danger. Nor, former, independent investigation setting stage foir possession. 13 judgment reversed, remanded further proceedings consistent opinion. 14 Reversed remanded. 15 BLACK dissents. contends adequately raise manner entry, sufficient opportunity indicate full circumstances surrounding arrest. counsel, course objecting, clearly stated facts 'sufficient justify officer's breaking into' objection truncated ruling judge. event, met merits Appeals, apparently contend inadequate its resolution; decided merits. these circumstances, are justified likewise doing so. may outer inner window house, part anything therein, execute warrant, if, after purpose, refused admittance necessary liberate himself aiding warrant.' also, Ng Pui Yu 352 626, 631 1965); Gatlin 117 App.D.C. 123, 130, 326 666, 673 (C.A.D.C. 1963); Cruz, 265 F.Supp. 15, (W.D.Tex. 1967). 47—59, 1636—1642, Brennan, While distinctions obvious, useful analogy burglary: forcible generally eliminated crime statutes using 'break,' similar words. R. Perkins, Criminal Law 149—150 (1957); Judge Michael & Wechsler, Its Administration 367—382 (1940); Note, Rationale Burglary, 51 Col.L.Rev. 1009, 1012—1015 (1951). Commentators viewed body similar. Voorhees, Arrest 159, 172—173 (1904); Wilgus, Without Warrant, 22 Mich.L.Rev. 798, 806 (1924): 'What constitutes 'breaking' seems same lifting latch, knob, unhooking hasp, removing prop to, pushing open, entrance house,—even screen * breaking. *' (Footnotes omitted.) Blakey, Rule Announcement Unlawful Entry, 112 U.Pa.L.Rev. 499 (1964). Munoz 325 26 Sims, 231 251, 254 (D.C.Md.1964); Stephens, 249 Cal.App.2d 113, 57 Cal.Rptr. 66 (1967). U.S., 38, S.Ct., 1632. do deal obtained ruse, involving 'breaking.' Smith 486, 488 (C.A. 5th 1966); Leahy 272 487, 1959). 5, 806. Exceptions possible constitutional relating recognized, see J.), little reason why limited exceptions since existed codification. supra.

Classification Label: 0