Legal Document

442 U.S. 200 99 Supreme Court Reporter 2248 60 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 824 Irving Jerome DUNAWAY, Petitioner,v.State of NEW YORK. Number 78-5066. Argued March 21, 1979. Decided June 5, Syllabus A Rochester, N. Y., police detective questioned a jail inmate, the supposed source lead implicating petitioner in an attempted robbery and homicide, but learned nothing that supplied "enough information to get warrant" for petitioner's arrest. Nevertheless, ordered other detectives "pick up" "bring him in." Petitioner was then taken into custody, although not told he under arrest, would have been physically restrained if had leave. He driven headquarters placed interrogation room, where by officers after being given warnings required Miranda versus Arizona, 384 436, 86 1602, 16 694. waived counsel eventually made statements drew sketches incriminated crime. At his state-court trial, motions suppress were denied, convicted. The New York appellate courts affirmed conviction, this vacated judgment, remanded further consideration light supervening decision Brown Illinois, 422 590, 95 2254, 45 416, which held there is no per se rule themselves suffice cure Fourth Amendment violation involved obtaining inculpatory during custodial following formal arrest on less than probable cause, order use such statements, prosecution must show only meet Fifth voluntariness standard, also causal connection between illegal broken sufficiently purge primary taint distinct policies interests Amendment. On remand from Appeals, trial court granted motion suppress, Appellate Division reversed, holding lacked cause petitioner, law enforcement officials may detain individual upon reasonable suspicion questioning period time carefully controlled conditions are ample protect individual's Sixth rights, even detention illegal, attenuated allow admission sketches. Held: 1. Rochester violated Fourteenth Amendments when, without they seized transported station interrogation. Pp. 206-216. (a) "seized" sense when involuntarily station, State concedes before incriminating statement 207. (b) Terry Ohio, 392 1, 88 1868, 20 889, limited "stop frisk" searches weapons so substantially intrusive arrests general requiring make "seizures" can be replaced test balancing privacy against opposing crime prevention detection officer's safety, case's progeny, do support application as hold case justified mere "reasonable suspicion." narrow intrusions its progeny judged rather because those fell far short kind intrusion associated with For all narrowly defined intrusions, requisite has performed centuries precedent embodied principle seizures supported cause. 208-214. (c) treatment whether or technically characterized important respects indistinguishable traditional Detention regardless label—intrudes severely protected necessarily trigger safeguards Cf. Davis Mississippi, 394 721, 89 1394, 22 676; supra. 214-216. 2. unconstitutional conduct obtained permit at 216-219. Even though proper "voluntary" purposes Amendment, "[t]he exclusionary rule, . utilized effectuate serves it Fifth." supra, 601, 2254. While confession found purposes, type "voluntariness" merely threshold requirement analysis. 216-217. Under analysis, focuses "the illegality confession," 603, factors considered determining exploitation include: temporal proximity confession, presence intervening circumstances, and, particularly, purpose flagrancy official misconduct. Here, admittedly hope something might turn up, confessed any event significance. 217-219. 61 A.D.2d 299, 402 N.Y.S.2d 490, reversed. Edward John Nowak, petitioner. Melvin Bressler, respondent. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion Court. 1 We decide question reserved 10 years ago Morales York, 396 102, 90 291, 24 299 (1969), namely, legality full-fledged arrest." Id., 106, S.Ct., 293. 2 * 26, 1971, proprietor pizza parlor N.Y., killed robbery. August 10, Detective Anthony Fantigrossi Police another officer informant possible lead—a inmate awaiting burglary—but App. 60.1 54. Three located neighbor's house morning 11. custody; Opinion People Dunaway (Monroe County Ct., Mar. 11, 1977), 116, 117. car 694 (1966). crime.2 3 jury felony murder, appeal, both Department Appeals initially conviction opinion. 42 689, 346 779 (1973), aff'd 35 N.Y.2d 741, 361 912, 320 North Eastern Reporter, 2nd 646 (1974). However, certiorari, Court's 416 (1975). 1053, 2674, 705 Brown, like Dunaway, receiving seizure—in Brown's denied used convict him. Although Illinois recognized unlawful, ground giving served break statements. This erred adopting sufficed violation; 4 In compliance remand, directed Monroe factual findings "and, detention, determine making confessions rendered infirm (see supra )." 38 812, 813-814, 382 40, 41, 345 583, 584 5 determined supplementary suppression hearing Dunaway's should granted. reaffirming "full mandate Arizona," "this does involve situation defendant voluntarily appeared response request ." State's attempt justify involuntary investigatory authority Morales, 55, 290 898, 238 307 (1968)—which upheld similar basis amounting arrest—was rejected grounds precedential value questionable,3 controlling "strong language" indicating "disdain arrest."4 predicate did amount sufficient defendant," defendant's seizure[,] [that] claim showing attenuation detention," 121. Accordingly Ibid. 6 divided agreeing majority relied Appeals' reaffirmation, subsequent decision, " '[l]aw brief rights'." 302, 492 (1978), quoting 129, 135, 397 587, 366 248, 251 (1977). emphasized never threatened abused purported distinguish Illinois.5 dismissed leave appeal. 134. 7 439 979, 563, 58 649 clarify Amendment's requirements permissible review court's Illinois. reverse. II 8 first consider took detained 9 applicable through Mapp 367 643, 81 1684, 1081 (1961), provides: "The right people secure their persons unreasonable seizures, shall violated, Warrants issue There little doubt station.6 And respondent interrogation.7 Nevertheless contends seizure therefore suspicion" possessed "intimate knowledge about serious unsolved crime." Brief Respondent 10. disagree. Before 889 (1968), guarantee analyzed terms warrants based basic principles relatively simple straightforward: term "arrest" synonymous governed circumstances,8 elaborated numerous precedents,9 treated absolute.10 "long-prevailing standards" best compromise accommodating [the] often interests" "safeguard[ing] citizens rash interferences privacy" "seek[ing] give fair leeway enforcing community's protection." Brinegar States, 338 160, 176, 69 1302, 1311, 93 L.Ed. 1879 (1949). standard thus represented accumulated wisdom experience minimum justification necessary "reasonable" applied arrests, need "balance" circumstances particular situations. Camara Municipal Court, 387 523, 87 1727, 18 930 (1967). 11 exception That brief, on-the-spot stop street frisk weapons, fit comfortably within concept "arrest." "necessarily swift action predicated observations beat" constituted "serious sanctity person, inflict great indignity arouse strong resentment," U.S., 20, 17, 1879, 1877, "must tested proscription seizures." 1879. since much severe "arrests," declined stretch Amendment—to cover intrusions. Instead, stop-and-frisk sui generis "rubric conduct," ibid. specially balanced safety. 22-27, 1880-1883. As consequence, established "a drawn search protection officer, reason believe dealing armed dangerous individual, 27, 1883.11 Thus, departed analysis two respects. First, special category could test. Second, led approve rigorous pat-down weapons. 12 Because careful maintain scope. itself limited, on-the-street weapons.12 Two cases frisks. See Adams Williams, 407 143, 92 1921, 32 612 (1972) (frisk suspicion); Pennsylvania Mimms, 434 98 330, 54 331 (1977) (order out "de minimis" lawfully traffic violations; "bulge" observed jacket). Brignoni-Ponce, 873, 2574, 607 (1975), context roving border patrols stopping automobiles check immigrants. investigative stops usually consumed minute two." 880, 2579. stated "[b]ecause nature intrusion, sort facts Ibid.13 alsoUnited Martinez-Fuerte, 428 543, 96 3074, 49 1116 (1976) (fixed checkpoint vehicles aliens); Delaware Prouse, 440 648, 1391, 59 660 (1979) (random checks drivers' licenses vehicle registration permitted articulable suspicion). 13 now urges apply test, interrogations, suspicion."14 clearly result. these Indeed, Brignoni-Ponce expressly refused extend manner urges. stated: driver passengers citizenship immigration status, ask them explain suspicious consent cause." 881-882, 2580. (emphasis added). Accord, 567, 3087. 14 contrast circumscribed cases, briefly found. home car, room. informed "free go"; indeed, accompany tried escape custody. depend magnitude termed state law. "booked," record proved fruitless, while insignificant see Cupp Murphy, 412 2000, 36 900 obviously roughly analogous progeny. "exception" threaten swallow 15 central importance probable-cause citizen's afforded guarantees cannot compromised fashion. roots deep our history." Henry 98, 100, 80 168, 170, 134 (1959). Hostility prime motivation adoption decisions immediately "common rumor report, suspicion, 'strong suspect' adequate warrant 101, 170 (footnotes omitted). familiar reflects benefit extensive relevant "reasonableness" provides relative simplicity clarity implementation workable rule. 175-176, 1310-1311. effect, us adopt multifactor circumstances" technical arrests.15 But protections intended Framers too easily disappear multifarious presented different especially done instance engaged "often competitive enterprise ferreting Johnson 333 14, 68 367, 369, 436 (1948). single, essential guide officers, who expertise reflect balance social specific confront.16 recognition dangers, consequent reluctance depart reflected limitations employing "balancing" 17 Moreover, confirm conclusion 679 decided Term Terry, fingerprints suspect excluded evidence. argued "was require cause," 726, 1397, occurred investigative, accusatory, stage, sole taking fingerprints. Rejecting argument, warned: "[T]o argue stage fundamentally misconceive Investigatory subject unlimited numbers innocent harassment ignominy incident detention. Nothing more clear meant prevent wholesale personal security citizenry, 'arrests' 'investigatory detentions.' 726-727, 1397. 19 second argument substantial, largely distinctions interrogation: "Fingerprinting involves none probing private life thoughts marks search. Nor fingerprint employed repeatedly harass one set each person's prints. Furthermore, fingerprinting inherently reliable effective crime-solving tool eye witness identifications abuses improper line-up 'third degree.' Finally, danger destruction fingerprints, come unexpectedly inconvenient time." 727, 1398. 21 Davis, however, unnecessary validity "narrowly procedure obtaining" suspects cause—in part because, emphasized, "petitioner fingerprinted subjected interrogation." 728, 1398 similarly disapproved "investigatory" trappings petitioner's, differences form exalted over substance.17 Once petitioner's. Our condemnation fits equally case: 23 impropriety obvious; awareness fact virtually conceded acknowledged, testimony, 'for investigation' 'questioning.' design execution, investigatory. embarked expedition evidence up." 605, 2262. also, id., 602, 2261. 25 These passages interrogation—regardless label intrudes accordingly III 26 remains nevertheless Wong Sun 371 471, 83 407, 441 (1963); Nardone 308 338, 266, 84 (1939); Silverthorne Lumber company 385, 40 182, 64 319 (1920). 27 consistently held, contest, settled Fifth," 2260, "Miranda warnings, exclusion them, alone deter violation." 28 "If themselves, attenuate how wanton purposeful violation, effect diluted. Arrests 'investigation,' encouraged derived therefrom well admissible expedient warnings." 29 Consequently, Amendment,18 "threshold requirement" 604, reached. 30 Beyond requirement, articulated designed vindicate "distinct Amendment." Following Sun, eschewed "but for" identified inquiry "whether arrest," 600, 2260; 488, 417. focus 2261, behind When close likely misconduct future, integrity courts. 31 several "in arrest[:t]he burden admissibility rests, course, prosecution." 603-604, 2261-62.19 Examining it, readily concluded failed sustain admissible. "less hours" elapsed "there significance whatsoever." "quality purposefulness" "expedition evidence" undertaken replica Brown. significance.20 three members abuse (presumably putting aside detention) "highly protective rights." A.D.2d, 303, N.Y.S.2d, 493. betrays lingering confusion "causal connection" Satisfying "threshold" condition No events broke confession. To admit "law violate impunity, safe wash hands 'procedural safeguards' Fifth."21 33 Reversed. 34 POWELL case. WHITE, concurring. read indicate almost unique hard-and-fast prior hold, key reasonableness—the competing interests. E. g., 653-654, 1396, (1979); Michigan Tyler, 499, 506, 1942, 1948, 56 486 (1978); Marshall Barlow's, Inc., 307, 321-322, 1816, 1825, 305 555, 3081, (1976); 878, 2578, (1975); 20-21, 1879; 536-537, 1734-1735, rules, Rakas 128, 421, 443, (1978) (dissenting opinion), large categorical basis—not ad hoc, case-bycase fashion officers. Mincey 437 394-395, 2408, 2414-2415, 57 (1978). hand, rules applicability precludes neither extraordinary public interests, cf. Zurcher Stanford Daily, 547, 564-565, 1970, 1981, 525 nor generic certain exceptions normal flexibility essential. Cf., e. It enough, me, here enough level way. 37 STEVENS, & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions join opinion, add comment 39 relationship ambiguous factor. If prolonged one. Conversely, immediate motivated prearrest visit minister. relevant, my insofar tendency motivate defendant. midnight guns will frightening acted recklessly good faith. courteous command same arrestee thinks knows not. either event, 41 recognize deterrence rationale sometimes interpreted quite differently.1 interpretation, substitute punishment offending officer; flagrantly, appropriate, faith, not.2 criminal broad societal interest suffers. methods profession whole—not aberrant officer—to enforce regular procedures avoid future invasion constitutional rights. reason, embody objective criteria subjective considerations. REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, dissenting. 43 announced opening sentence opinion—"decide 291 'the arrest' "—I difficulty joining question, not, contrary implication sentence, goes conclude meaning dissipate alleged unlawful conduct. Ante, 207, agree conclusion, accordingly, dissent. 44 prohibits calling asking talk them; anything prevents knocking door person answers door, inquiring willing answer questions wish put "Obviously, intercourse policemen 'seizures' persons." n. 16, (1968). Voluntary involving "seizure" take place number varying circumstances. occasions few agrees street, house, later regrets willingness questions. morning-after render responses voluntary made. view, accompanied purposes. "Only means physical force authority, some way liberty citizen we 'seizure' occurred." case, dispatched participation According testimony approached thought knocked door. answered himself asked name. 97-98. After learning questioning, responded would. 89-90; 301, 491 custody warned resist flee. displayed handcuffed. Each testified touched trip downtown; freedom police. 78-79, 99. short, behavior entirely free "physical authority." 46 categorically states text "[t]here 'seized' station." accompanying footnote, states: "Respondent 'seized.' otherwise 207 6. cite commentary Tentative Draft ALI Model Code Pre-Arraignment Procedure "request 'may carry obligation, appearance itself, unless voluntary, awesome ordinary citizen.' 47 heavy reliance conclusions misplaced, however. seizure. solely until reached "had said detectives, (per stipulation hearing)." vitiates voluntarily. Similarly, unexpressed intentions hypothetical situations bearing conduct, objectively viewed, authority. 48 Division's assistance characterizes "as accept station. contrary, recitation facts, recites officers' agreed downtown them. 491, 492. able resolve 248 (1977), mean quotes assertion. dispute indeed "awesome experience." think every assents headquarters, turns coercive threatening, measure feel cowed officer. Oregon Mathiason, 429 492, 495, 97 711, 713, 50 714 (1977).1 Therefore, degree compelling demonstrates what happened. shown place. 51 Assuming, arguendo, still requires Relying concludes suppressed primarily, seems, 219. allegedly, trial. (1963). 52 product requirement. "an factor." 2261-2262. Also misconduct." assign equal weight factors. Given deterrent "purpose flagrancy" is, most Where faith flagrant manner, 612, 2266 (POWELL, J., concurring part). "Absent aggravating advised rights removed trial." 53 received 216. 61; Peltier, 531, 2313, 2316-2317, 1382 (1968).2 atestified 35. gave hour day. Contrary suggestion, 2262; convincingly would, therefore, affirm judgment York. 116-117. An reportedly James Cole someone named "Irving" know "Irving's" last name, picture file. information, interviewed Cole, pending indictment burglary. involvement crime, months earlier Hubert Adams. mentioned younger brother, Ba Adams, fellow "Irving," known "Axelrod," station; day second, complete statement. certiorari noted ruling below, manifestly important, beyond Sibron 1899, 1912, 917 claimed odds (1969)." 104-105, 293, (1969). inadequacies development reserve today "squarely presents fully illuminates arises." 105, gone 137-138, 591-592, 252-253 118; 303-304, five dissented issue. 304, 493 (Denman, concurring); 305, 494 (Cardamone, dissenting). "It whenever accosts restrains walk away, person." "seized." 7-9. otherwise, 117, quoted 205, suspicion. 302-303, ALI, Pre-arraignment § 2.01(3) commentary, Page 91 (Tent.Draft 1966) (request "may citizen"). Both here. 492; 120, citing Spinelli 393 410, 584, 637 (1969); Aguilar Texas, 378 108, 1509, 723 (1964). See, Warden Hayden, 294, 1642, 782 (1967) (hot pursuit); Watson, 423 411, 820, 598 (felony places). "Probable exists [the officers'] reasonably trustworthy [are] man caution belief that' offense committed [by arrested]." 1310-11, (1949), Carroll 267 132, 162, 280, 288, 543 (1925). generally W. LaFave, Search Seizure: Treatise 436-480 Gerstein Pugh, 420 103, 111-112, 854, 861-862 Ker California, 374 23, 1623, 726 stressed limits holding: safety others reasonable—based inferences facts—so appropriate detached, neutral scrutiny judge," 1880, 1883, extent tailored justifying it. specifically address propriety 'detention' and/or matter stop: "There Constitution policeman addressing anyone streets. Absent frisked refuse cooperate go seems me pertinent Of stopped obliged answer, compelled, refusal furnishes alert continued observation." 34, 1886. "[B]ecause governmental stake, minimal stop, absence practical alternatives policing border, contain aliens illegally country, investigate provoke 881, scope produce, completely clear. apparently tests (1977): '[L]aw rights' (42 N.Y.2d, N.E.2d, 251). ' "[A] policeman's discharging duties hinge intensity interference, gravity attending encounter" 137, 591, 251, De Bour, 210, 219, 386 375, 382, 352 562, 569." Then, characterizing suggested yet third "test": "[T]his accusation filed existed solving brutal remained months." proposed clear, cited approval weigh encounter." guns, handcuffed unlike teenager; report pistol occasion, 594. resorted measures resisted Westover 494-497, 1638-1639, (1966) (decided Arizona). generally, 9, 630-638; Comment, Emory L.J. 227, 239-244 Houston L.Rev. 753, 763-770 (1976). parallel 2, supra; 595-596, 2257-2258, "clearly result fruit first." 12, dissenting, post, 226. mind sued damages, Neither treats points departure today's supports headquarters. disagreement Chicago apartment searched entered apartment, gunpoint, searched. escorted squad 593, 2256. activity observation here, moreover, quality purposefulness. effected gives having calculated surprise, fright, confusion." but, out, ante, 205 3, ultimately

Classification Label: 0