Legal Document

464 U.S. 287 104 S.Ct. 641 78 L.Ed.2d 477 MICHIGAN, Petitionerv.Raymond CLIFFORD and Emma Jean Clifford. No. 82-357. Argued Oct. 5, 1983. Decided Jan. 11, 1984. Syllabus Respondents' private residence was damaged by an early morning fire while they were out of town. Firefighters extinguished the blaze at 7:04 a.m., which time all officials police left premises. Five hours later, a team arson investigators arrived for first to investigate cause blaze. They found work crew on scene boarding up house pumping water basement. The learned that respondents had been notified instructed their insurance agent send secure house. Nevertheless, entered conducted extensive search without obtaining either consent or administrative warrant. Their began in basement where two Coleman fuel cans crock pot attached electrical timer. determined caused timer set deliberately. After seizing marking evidence basement, extended upper portions additional arson. Respondents charged with moved suppress seized warrantless ground it obtained violation rights under Fourth Fourteenth Amendments. Michigan trial court denied motion exigent circumstances justified search. On interlocutory appeal, Court Appeals no existed reversed. Held: judgment is affirmed part reversed part. Justice POWELL, joined BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, concluded reasonable expectations privacy remain fire-damaged premises, searches into origin are subject warrant requirement Amendment absent circumstances. There especially strong here retained significant interests home. Because areas respondents' home authorized neither nor circumstances, Amendments must be suppressed. Pp. 29 -299. (a) Where necessary suffices if primary object determine fire, but criminal warrant, upon showing probable cause, required gather activity. 291-295. (b) not continuation earlier search, made delay between midday unreasonable consent, v. Tyler, 436 499, 98 1942, 56 486, distinguished. known could only have requiring Even valid would upstairs since as soon originated scope limited area. 296-298. STEVENS contravention because effort provide fair advance notice inspection respondents. A nonexigent, forceful, entry cannot unless investigator has some give owner present investigation made. 303- 305. Janice M. Joyce Bartee, Detroit, Mich., pro hac vici, petitioner. K. Preston Oade, Jr., Southfield, POWELL announced delivered opinion Justices MARSHALL joined. 1 This case presents questions authority investigators, absence enter recent fire. 2 * Respondents, Raymond Clifford, arrested connection residence. At preliminary examination held establish alleged offense, State introduced various pieces physical evidence, most through nonconsensual Clifford's this That bound over trial. Before trial, again during evidentiary hearing certified its ruling appeal 3 there justifying Instead, Clifford pursuant policy Arson Division Detroit Fire Department sanctioned such long present, premises open trespass, occurred within inconsistent 486 (1978), Cliffords' violated We granted certiorari clarify doubt appears exist application our decision Tyler. II 4 In October 18, 1980, erupted Cliffords town camping trip time. reported Department, units about 5:42 a.m. 5 8:00 Lieutenant Beyer, section received instructions He informed suspected he other assignments, Beyer did proceed immediately his partner finally 1:00 p.m. 18. 6 When arrived, scene. six inches neighbor told called request also advised plan return day. While waited pumped out, can driveway marked evidence.1 7 By 1:30 p.m., partner, quickly confirmed beneath stairway. detected odor throughout more As dug debris, wires leading plugged outlet few feet away. turn approximately 3:45 back off 9:00 It stopped somewhere 4:00 4:30 All marked. 8 determining searched remainder followed thorough. photographer take pictures drawers closets them full old clothes. inspected rooms noted nails walls pictures. wiring cassettes video tape machine machine. 9 exclude exhibits testimony based arson, therefore per se Petitioner, hand, argues entire should exempt from requirement. III 10 petition certiorari, does challenge state court's finding asks us investigations decline do so. 11 we restated Court's position generally require warrants. U.S., 504-508, S.Ct., 1947-1949. See Marshall Barlow's, Inc., 307, 1816, 305 (1978); Camara Municipal Court, 387 523, 87 1727, 18 930 (1967); City Seattle, 541, 1737, 943 (1967). reaffirm view today. Except certain carefully defined classes cases,2 property governed constitutionality entries onto therefore, normally turns several factors: whether legitimate protected Amendment; justify government intrusion regardless any privacy; and, 12 observed Tyler may "People go living homes working offices after when impossible, effects often premises." 505, 1948. Privacy will vary type property, amount damage, prior continued use cases owner's efforts against intruders. Some fires so devastating ash ruins, subjective expectations. test essentially objective one: "the expectation [is] one society prepared recognize 'reasonable.' " Katz United States, 389 347, 361, 88 507, 516, 19 576 (1967) (Harlan, J., concurring). Smith Maryland, 442 735, 739-741, 99 2577, 2579-2581, 61 220 (1979). If applies, official B 13 burning building course creates exigency justifies fight Moreover, once building, need remain3 "a extinguished." 510, 1950. Where, however, begun scene, identification new exigency. 14 aftermath exigencies tolerate obtain inspect premises.4 serves compelling public interest, apply cases. C 15 necessary, determines required. suffice.5 To show undetermined proposed intrude unnecessarily victim's privacy, executed convenient 16 activity, believe relevant place searched. activity discovered "plain view" doctrine. Coolidge New Hampshire, 403 443, 465-466, 91 2022, 2037-2038, 564 (1971). then used not, rely expand making successful independent judicial officer. 17 important even exist. Circumstances determined. If, example, immediate ensure rekindling, broader than reasonably achieve end. plain traditional cause.6 home, least arguably, viewed separate ones: delayed area, residential portion now principles outlined above each these searches. IV two-and-one-half story brick frame Although damage lower interior structure, exterior largely undamaged although smoke damage. firemen broken doors windows fighting uninhabitable. But personal belongings remained, arranged secured absence. Under light associated hold post-fire Thus, both each. 20 noted, claim modify case. rejected State's argument second. 21 upheld furniture store, despite last flames being doused, completed darkness. resumed promptly cleared daylight dawned. interrupted reasons evident, "no actual first, lack thus invalidate resulting seizure evidence." 511, 1951. 22 conceded oral argument, distinguishable reasons. First, challenged Between firefighters begin investigation, taken steps remained further intrusion. These extinguish later different officers origin. Second, residence—particularly acted—were significantly greater those mid-day frequently residence.7 facts—the interim burned-out heightened distinguish homeowner subsequent exigency.8 So purpose ascertain suffice. 23 known, house, described above, crime Absent requires 24 rekindling. stairs, whatever lawfully undertake determination undertaken before officer, Amendments, validity search.9 25 regions telling illustration importance review case, presumably prevented An license roam freely V 26 three empty cans, electric pot, cord. concerning discovery cord—as well investigators' related testimony—were product unconstitutional affirm excluded evidence. One driveway. seen initial firefighters. admissible investigators. Exclusion 27 ordered. 28 STEVENS, concurring judgment. I continue views expressed my opinions 512, 1951, 325, 1827, Zurcher Stanford Daily, 547, 577-578, 583, 1970, 1987-88, 1990, 525 Donovan Dewey, 452 594, 606-608, 101 2534, 2542-43, 69 262 (1981), am unable join POWELL's opinion. agree him, holding supports commanded 30 unanimity general propositions regarding protection afforded building. No right make unannounced, nonconsensual, reasonableness too explanation. Nor disagreement firemen's until satisfied danger unanimous located originated, issued committed, specifically describing places items seized. issues divide (1) regarded original (2) constitutional. 31 conclusion Beyer's rather merely entry, ante, 296, disagree REHNQUIST's indistinguishable regard, post, 306-307. willing treat reentries same who earlier1 "continuation" attempt temporarily suspended visibility severely hindered darkness, steam, smoke. same2 shortly daybreak indeed continuation" Ibid. Unlike contrast fire's account conditions opportunity hampering subsided. pump arrival apparently nothing fact collected might temporary suspension investigative commenced abandoned officials, amounts post hoc justification apparent basis reality. general, personnel involved departure justifiably actually occasioned WHITE measuring emergency search: "[O]nce over." 1953. add presumption rekindling thereafter slight second rebutted information demonstrating previously unknown unrecognized 32 Presumably owner. Once established, searches, course, raise issues. concerned investigator's force necessary. problem, then, identify constraints imposed officer's entry. 33 context, construed four ways. issue supported committed. Such reference text clauses Amendment.3 member strict construction Amendment. 34 allow cause. Following supra, takes position. odds defeats Warrant Clause, enabling magistrate's rubber stamp otherwise reasonable. 35 Third, ever suspect REHNQUIST persuasively position,4 inspectors notify building's owners inspection. Post, 311, n. 4. 36 fourth position—the command—would order unannounced characterize whenever inspector given sufficient enable him so.5 37 Unless entitled going ascertaining conducted, virtually eliminating potentially confrontational forcible Advance best safeguard allowing possessions legitimately prefer strangers see sight, permitting assure exceed bounds. risk unexplained harm loss minimized respond volunteer assist true, increase somewhat likelihood guilty conceal destroy seems assume diligently cover traces events. event, committed lacking, justifications spot inspections regulatory contexts mere suspicion individual engaged insufficient individual's forceful entails. 38 Since kind respondent, proper occasion defining character given. convinced, Naturally, attempts interfere performance duties, appropriate sanctions permissible. 39 issuance neutral magistrate manner conduct, intrusive nature demonstrated provided. 582, 1990 (STEVENS, dissenting). 40 pointed 310, 3, inapplicable notice, prove futile record foreclose possibility advise them, possibly party representatives company board resulted friend carried avoided plainly improper already identified. 41 conclude Accordingly, concur 42 REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, BLACKMUN, O'CONNOR join, dissenting. 43 Six Terms ago addressed applicability Amendment's Clause activities fighters following warehouse. divided itself "exigent circumstance" allowed Id., 509-510, 1949-1950. "re-entry" departed "actual visits weeks precepts proved easy apply, "we Tyler." Ante, 289. demonstrates beyond peradventure purpose, totally failed accomplish it; today's opinion, far clarifying doubtful aspects sows confusion broadside. circumstances" doctrine enunciated remaining parts 44 Judging simply comparison facts Lt. 18th—some premises—was term fought removed containing lantern placed Thus here, went contemporaneously it, morning. reason six-hour differently treated five-hour warehouse 45 seeks situations differences seem me trivial immaterial. says "had intrusion." 296. question invasion interest amounting bearing constitute exception what concededly intimates "fire fighters" afternoon. obviously neatly compartmentalized, shown themselves alert signs 46 purports statement particularly store. . ." store characterized damaged," surely deserves characterization; "fire-damaged." well-established commercial buildings context much dwellings. 542-543, 1738-39, (citing cases). And certainly establishment applies equal, greater, necessity 47 uphold 48 (1967), city housing entering possible health code violations. protect unbridled discretion municipal inspectors, magistrate. Camara, 534, 1733-34. abating hazards, relatively inhering non-criminal focus inspection, dissenters "newfangled." See, 1741 (Clark, Probable sound terms legislative standards governing particular 538, 1735-1736. 49 concede correctness Camara-See line agreeing applied prompt practice investigating long-standing widespread acceptance. conducting careful undeniably strong. reveal assess effectiveness local codes preventing limiting spread bring suggesting Entry causes observable outside uninformed occupant. States Green, 474 F.2d 1385, 1388-89 (CA5 1973). Certainly 50 concerns imposition fire.1 doctrine, dispute flames. 509, 1949-50, (1976). control knock windows, chop holes roofs walls, structure unlikely concern coming learn why victims, unlike occupants ordinary times, expect welcome intrusions police, medical period Likewise, relative agents structure. hardly substantially analogous arrive 51 Ample exists municipality authorize program permit real sense considered result came home.2 happening fortuitous event control. prevent individuals subjected unfettered power initiate limit investigator, contingent control.3 52 view, utility evaluate grounds incidental imposing Here short extinguishing flames, away fully trespass. reasonable.4 put side door arrival. e.g. (1981) (heavily regulated business); Biswell, 406 92 1593, (1972) (same); Colonnade 397 72, 90 774, 60 (1970) (same). exceptions recognized applicable suggest vary. many hazardous wholly extinguished, collapsing extend re-entry. critical inquiry time, so, re-entries. For threat rekindle investigation. "Immediate preserve intentional accidental destruction." legislative, administrative, judicially prescribed respect dwelling. special accompany searching solely customarily remove rubble likely found. comes preserved Payton York, 445 573, 589-90, 100 1371, 1381-82, 63 639 (1980); District 407 297, 313, 2125, 2134-35, 752 (1972). Reasonable depending involved. Expectations residences offices. be, diminished prevail safety. breaks apartment unit complex, future hazard. cases, bright separating firefighters' distinction involve lapse number single-family dwelling determined, end apartment, complexities conduct expansive longer periods repeated re-entries 6, 1950, 6. Chief Assistant Sommerville Detective Webb accompanied 3:30 501-502, 1945-46. true observe anything Webb, earlier. "The states free 'shall violated';1 unequivocally prohibits warrants except 'upon cause.'2" 326, 1827. "1 'The people persons, houses, papers, effects, seizures, shall violated. .' "2 '[A]nd Warrants issue, Oath affirmation, searched, persons things seized.' extent, relies analysis flawed. suppose dispense present. Surely would. analytical purposes, rationale similar fires, including arsonists. prohibiting reading carries express Clause. so-called suffice submit, contemplated clause. persuaded investigatory reasonable—even cause—when owner, Reasonableness stamp. What constitutes case-by-case basis. addition, wait embers gasses cooled, out. abundantly clear Department's regulating investigations. encourages possible. occupied business trying business, children, adult Only trespass Joint Appendix, 9a, 12a, 19a (testimony Capt. Monroe). majority stated major function reassure legality 508, 1949, relationship informational clear. Proper notifying allay fears impostors contact where, town, appear owners. Notice informs possessing Yet failure fails way purposes exclusionary rule. point fact, unavailable, gone fishing. J.A., 16a. deemed constructive ascertained legitimacy inspectors' visit.

Classification Label: 0