Legal Document

390 U.S. 234 88 Supreme Court Reporter 992 19 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 1067 James or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 HARRIS, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. Number 92. Argued Jan. 18, 1968. Decided March 5, Paul Weinstein, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Francis X. Beytagh, Jr., Cleveland, Ohio, respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner was charged with robbery under the District of Columbia Code. D.C.Code Ann. § 22—2901. At his trial in Columbia, petitioner moved to suppress an automobile registration card belonging victim, which Government sought introduce evidence. The court, after a hearing, ruled that admissible. convicted crime and sentenced imprisonment period two seven years. On appeal, panel Appeals Circuit reversed, holding car had been obtained by means unlawful search. Government's petition rehearing en banc was, however, granted, full affirmed petitioner's conviction, judges dissenting. We granted certiorari consider problem presented Fourth Amendment. 386 1003, 87 1353, 432 (1967). affirm. 2 Petitioner's seen leaving site robbery. traced arrested as he entering it near home. After cursory search car, arresting officer took police station. decided impound evidence, crane called tow precinct. It reached precinct about hour quarter this moment, windows were open door unlocked. begun rain. 3 A regulation Metropolitan Police Department requires who takes impounded vehicle charge thoroughly, remove all valuables from it, attach property tag listing certain information circumstances impounding. Pursuant regulation, without warrant, proceeded lot towed, order vehicle, place on roll up windows, lock doors. entered driver's side, searched tied steering wheel. Stepping out rolled window one back Proceeding front passenger opened secure door. He then saw card, lay face metal stripping over closes. returned precinct, brought confronted card. disclaimed knowledge seized into Returning trunk, locked 4 sole question our consideration is whether discovered illegal hold did not. admissibility evidence found result not case. precise detailed findings Court, accepted Appeals, effect discovery but measure taken protect while custody. Nothing Amendment obtain warrant these narrow circumstances. 5 Once lawfully opened, name victim plainly visible. has long settled objects falling plain view right be position have are subject seizure may introduced Ker versus State California, 374 23, 42—43, 83 1623, 1634, 1635, 10 726 (1963); Lee, 274 559, 47 746, 71 L.Ed. 1202 (1927); Hester States, 265 57, 44 445, 68 898 (1924). 6 Affirmed. 7 Mr. Justice MARSHALL no part decision 8 DOUGLAS, concurring. 9 Though Preston 376 364, 84 881, 11 777, mentioned Court's opinion, & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions assume survived because present case (1) custody, responsible protecting car; (2) engaged performance their duty inventory other they came across incriminating

Classification Label: 0