Legal Document

338 U.S. 25 69 Supreme Court Reporter 1359 93 L.Ed. 1782 WOLFv.PEOPLE OF THE STATE COLORADO (two cases). Nos. 17 and 18. Argued Oct. 19, 1948. Decided June 27, 1949. Mr. Philip Hornbein, Denver, Colo., for petitioner. James S. Henderson, respondent. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The precise question consideration is this: Does a conviction by State court offense deny 'due process law' required Fourteenth Amendment, solely because evidence that was admitted at trial obtained under circumstances which would have rendered it admissible in prosecution violation federal law United States there deemed to be an infraction Fourth Amendment as applied Weeks versus States, 232 383, 34 341, 58 652, L.R.A.1915B, 834, Ann.Cas.1915C, 1177? Colorado has sustained convictions such admitted, 117 Colo. 279, 187 Pacific Reporter, 2nd Series 926; 321, 928, we brought cases here. 333 879, 68 910, 92 1155. 2 Unlike specific requirements restrictions placed Bill Rights, Amendments & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions VIII, upon administration criminal justice authority, did not subject limitations. notion guaranteed shorthand first eight amendments Constitution thereby incorporates them been rejected this again again, after mpressive consideration. See, e.g., Hurtado California, 110 516, 4 111, 292, 28 232; Twining New Jersey, 211 78, 29 14, 53 97; Brown Mississippi, 297 287, 56 461, 80 682; Palko Connecticut, 302 319, 149, 82 288. Only other day reaffirmed rejection thorough reexamination scope function Due Process Clause Amendment. Adamson 332 46, 47 1672, 91 1903, 171 American Law Reports 1223. issue closed. 3 For purposes ascertaining imposed enforcement their law, adhere views expressed supra, That decision speaks us particularly matters civil liberty, included Chief Hughes, Brandeis, Stone Cardozo, speak only dead. In rejecting suggestion incorporated original Cardozo reaffimred on behalf affirmed but deeper more pervasive conception Clause. This exacts from lowliest most outcast all 'implicit concept ordered liberty.' page 325, 152. thus conveys neither formal nor fixed narrow requirements. It compendious expression those rights courts must enforce they are basic our free society. any one time, even though, matter human experience, some may too rhetorically called eternal verities. very nature society advance its standards what reasonable right. Representing does living principle, due confined within permanent catalogue given time limits or essentials fundamental rights. 5 To rely tidy formula easy determination right legal satisfy longing certainty ignores movements belittles scale process. real clue problem confronting judiciary application ask where line once drawn recognize draw gradual empiric 'inclusion exclusion.' Davidson Orleans, 96 97, 104, 24 616. Court's insight when consider problem; whole faithful case come before since Orleans decided. 6 security one's privacy against arbitrary intrusion police—which core Amendment—is therefore implicit 'the liberty' enforceable againt through knock door, whether night, prelude search, without authority police, need commentary recent history condemned inconsistent with enshrined constitutional documents English-speaking peoples. 7 Accordingly, no hesitation saying were affirmatively sanction police incursion into run counter guaranty But ways enforcing raise questions different order. How conduct should checked, remedies afforded, means made effective, so dogmatically answered preclude varying solutions spring allowable range judgment issues susceptible quantitative solution. 8 held barred use secured illegal search seizure. ruling 1914. derived explicit Amendment; based legislation expressing Congressional policy Constitution. judicial implication. Since then frequently stoutly it. immediate protection demands exclusion logically relevant unreasonable seizure because, crime, excluded. As inherent reason, suppose men complete devotion might give answers. When find fact world regard vital obtained, hesitate treat remedy essential ingredient contrariety impressive view careful reconsideration light decision. 9 I. Before 27 had passed admissibility unlawful 10 (a) Of these, 26 opposed doctrine. (See Appendix, Table A.) 11 (b) anticipated (Table B.) 12 II. told C.) 13 20 time. 14 (1) foregoing followed D.) 15 (2) E.) 16 reviewed prior decisions contrary Weeks, overruling distinguishing decisions. F.) 18 adhered Weeks. G) 19 (c) formulation H.) III. today 30 reject doctrine, agreement I.) IV. jurisdictions Kingdom British Commonwealth Nations question, none inadmissible. J.) 21 doctrine left protection.1 Indeed, directly serves protect whose person premises something incriminating found. We cannot, therefore, departure remand persons, together who emerge scatheless private action internal discipline eyes alert public opinion, afford. Granting practice effective way deterring searches, condemn falling below minimal assured State's reliance methods which, if consistently enforced, equally effective. Weighty testimony insistence own (then Judge) People Defore, 242 N.Y. 13, 150 Northeastern KF135 N59 585.2 cannot brush aside experience deem incidence condust slight call deterrent disciplinary measures overriding rules evidence. There are, moreover, reasons excluding less compelling local authority. community can far effectively exerted oppresive part responsible itself than sporadically aroused, bear remote pervasively throughout country. 22 hold, crime forbid admission And though interpreted evidence, presented Congress legislative powers pass statute purporting negate faced respect accorded default judgment, forced depend own. Problems converse character, also us, § uindertake attempting make binding States. 23 Affirmed. APPENDIX.* TABLE Atlantic STATES WHICH OPPOSED WEEKS DOCTRINE BEFORE CASE HAD BEEN DECIDED. ALA. Shields State, 104 Ala. 35, Southern S69 85, Am.St.Rep. 17. ARK. Starchman 62 Ark. 538, 36 Southwestern S79 940. CONN. Grisworld, 67 Conn. 290, 1046, 33 L.R.A. 227. GA. Williams 100 Ga. 511, Southeastern S6 624, 39 269. IDAHO Bond, Idaho 424, 439, 86 P2 43, 47. ILL. Siebert People, 143 Ill. 571, 583, 32 431. 31 KANS. Miller, 63 Kan. 62, 64 1033. ME. See Gorham, 65 Me. 270, 272. MD. Lawrence 103 Md. 17, 96, 103. MASS. Dana, Metc. 329. 35 MICH. Aldorfer, 164 Mich. 676, 130 Northwestern N69 351. MINN. Strait, 94 Minn. 384, 102 913. 37 MO. Pomeroy, Mo. 489, 1002. 38 MONT. Fuller, Mont. 12, 85 369, 373, L.R.A.,N.S., 762, Ann.Cas. 648. NEB. Geiger Neb. 545. N.H. Flynn, 64. 40 Adams, 176 351, 636, 406, 98 675. 41 N.C. Wallace, 162 622, 78 1, Ann.Cas.1915B, 423. 42 OKLA. Silva Okl.Cr. 116 199. 43 ORE. McDaniel, Or. 161, 169—170, 520, 523. 44 S.C. Atkinson, 363, 371, 1021, 1024, 877. 45 S.D. Madison, 584, 591, 122 647, 650. 46 TENN. Cohn 120 Tenn. 61, 109 1149, 451, 1201. Vt. Mathers, 101, 590, 268, 921. 48 WASH. Royce, Wash. 49 W. Va. Edwards, 51 W.Va. 220, 229, 429, 432—433, 59 465. 50 baron FORMULATED DECISION. 52 IOWA Sheridan, 121 Iowa 164, 730. C. 54 HAVE PASSED ON SINCE WAS 55 Every except Rhode Island. see Lorenzo, 72 R.I. 175, 407, 316 (holding defendant consented he rule applied, timely motion suppress made). D. FOR FIRST TIME AFTER DECISION AND IN SO DOING FOLLOWED IT. 57 FLA. Atz Andrews, 84 Fla. IND. Flum 193 Ind. 585, 141 353. KY. Youman Commonwealth, 189 Ky. 152, 224 860, 1303. 60 MISS. Tucker 128 Miss. 211, 90 845, 1377. 61 WIS. Hoyer 180 Wis. 89, 673. WYO. George, Wyo. 223, 231 683. E. REJECTED ARIZ. Argetakis Ariz. 599, 212 372. 66 CALIF. Mayen, 188 Rptr. California (West’s) 237, 205 435, 1383 (adopting general decided ground apply return property seized COLO. Massantonio 77 392, 236 1019. DEL. Chuchola, W.W.Harr. 133, (distinguishing decisions). LA. Fleckinger, 152 La. 337, 115. convention 1921 refused adopt amendment incorporating rule. Eddins, 161 240, 108 468. 70 NEV. Chin Gim, Nev. 431, 798. 71 N.J. Statev. Black, 135 685, N.J.Misc 48. N.M. Dillon, 366, 281 474, 88 340. 73 N.D. Fahn, 203, 67. 74 OHIO Lindway, 131 Ohio St. 166, North Eastern 490. 75 PA. Dabbierio, 290 Pa. 174, 138 679. 76 TEX. Welchek Tex.Cr.R. 271, 247 524. 1925, changed providing 'no officer provisions laws Texas, America, shall accused case.' Texas Laws chapter 49, amended, Code Crim.Proc. 727a (Vernon, 1948). UTAH Aime, Utah 476, 220 704, 375. VA. Hall 727, 154. 79 Federal KF105 F3 WHICH, DECISION, OVERRULED OR DISTINGUISHED PRIOR CONTRARY DECISIONS. 81 expressly follow Myers, 396, 440, repudiated Myers adopted Arregui, 254 788, 463. After two following former state rule, Illinois Castree, 311 112, 357. 83 Marxhaus n, 204 559, 557, 1505 earlier preliminary Graham, 295 695, 194, supported old dictum, Owens, 348, 259 100, 383 dismiss ex rel. King District Court, 191, 862. Gore 394, 218 87 Gooder, 619, 234 610. cf. 1935, now 34.1102 (1939), amending Rev.Code 1919, 4606 (all valid warrant notwithstanding defects issuance warrant). Hughes 145 544, 238 588, 639 A). 89 Gibbons, 118 171, 203 390. 720, 114 257 G. REVIEWED DECISIONS ADHERED TO THOSE Banks 207 179, 293, 1359. Benson 149 633, 233 758. 95 Reynolds, 101 224, 125 636. Jackson 156 119 525. 97 Johnson, 58, 226 245. Schoppe, 113 10, 16, 867 (alternative holding, noticing Weeks). 99 Meisinger 155 195, 536, 142 190. Laws, 1929, Ann., Article (1947 Supp.) (in misdemeanors, inadmissible). Wilkins, 243 Mass. 356, 11. Pluth, 157 145, 195 789. Billings 596, 191 Western 721. Agalos, 241, 242, 107 314 (not 585; Richter's Jewelers, 291 169, 690, 693, 560 adoption og Con stitution same language Civil Rights Law, McK. Consol. 6, construed Defore occasion changing interpretation, especially proceedings framed show change intended). 105 Simmons, 183 684, 591 between evidentiary articles corpus delicti). 106 Folkes, 174 568, 588—589, 25. Laundy, 443, 493—495, 958, 974 975, 206 290. granting illegally Blacksburg Beam, 146, 441, L.R.A.1916E, 714; South Carolina Green, 230, 317. VT. Stacy, 379, 401, 160 257, 266, 747. Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 HAS ITS FORMULATION DOCTRINE. 111 Rowley, 197 977, 881 (recognizing 112 SUMMARY PRESENT POSITION Weeks: 115 Ala., Ariz., Ark., Calif., Conn., Del., Ga., Kans., La., Me., Md., Mass., Minn., Neb., Nev., N.H., N.J., N.M., N.Y., N.C., N.D., Ohio, Ore., Pa., S.C., Utah, Vt., Fla., Idaho, Ill., Ind., Iowa, Ky., Mich., Miss., Mo., Mont., Okla., S.D., Tenn., Wash., Va., Wis., Judge JURISDICTIONS UNITED KINGDOM BRITISH COMMONWEALTH NATIONS HELD ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY ILLEGAL SEARCH SEIZURE. AUSTRALIA Miller Noblet, (1927) S.A.S.R. 385. CANADA ALTA. Rex Nelson, (1922) W.W.R. 381, D.L.R. 180. MAN. Durousel, Man. 15, (1933) 446. 123 ONT. Regina Doyle, Ont. 347. 124 SASK. Kostachuk, Sask. 485, Can.C.C. 189. ENGLAND Elias Pasmore, (1934) K.B. 164. 126 INDIA ALL. Ali Ahmad Khan Emperor, I.C. 615(1). 127 CAL. Baldeo Bin 639. RANG. Chwa Hum Htive 824. 129 SCOTLAND Hodgson McPherson, (1913) S.C.(J.) 68, 73. BLACK, concurring. petitioner convicted conducted manner 'unreasonable' officers used defendants courts. stated my dissenting 1683, agree conclusion Amendment's prohibition 'unreasoanble searches seizures' states. Consequently, reversal thought prohibited 'unreasonable seizures,' also, itself, obtained. appears plain implication exclusionary command judicially created negate. McNabb 318 332, 608, 819. leads me concur affirmance. 132 amiss repeat belief intended entirety applicable designed people unrestrained seizures sheriffs, policemen officers. Such am unable over-Zealous ruthless country 'ordered over-zealous Certainly activities, up now, closely touched intimate daily lives activities A officer's 'knock door * law,' be, shows, just ominous officer. 133 DOUGLAS, dissenting. 134 believe BLACK his dissent 1684, 1223, MURPHY excluded prosecutions well prosecutions, absence sanction. him test improperly judgments reversed. MURPHY, whom RUTLEDGE joins, 136 disheartening much seems fundamentally wrong. course prohibits proscribed clause views, 123, 1711, Quite apart blanket devotee democracy ill suit name suggest home's unlicensed governmental invasion 'of essence scheme difficult understand how go yet unwilling step meaning pronouncements utters. 137 Imagination zeal invent dozen content commands limited currently available. legislate ideal system. If attempt arch ordinary today, three devices: evidence; violators; violators trespass. Alternatives deceptive. Their statement impression possibility next. blinding. alternative exclusion. all. 139 perfectly clear 1914, unanimous 393, 344, 1915C, 1177. 'If letters citizen offense,' said, 4th declaring secure seizures, value, and, concerned, stricken Constitution.' 'It reduce form words.' Holmes, J., Silverthorne Lumber company 251 385, 182, 183, 1426. 140 Today wipes statements books tis bland citation 'other remedies.' Little said concerning possibilities prosecution. Self-scrutiny lofty ideal, exaltation reaches new heights expect Attorney prosecute himself associates well-meaning violations during raid ordered.1 appealing ring another alternative. trespass damages venerable securing reparation unauthorized home. Why put writ use? cites permitting action, complete. illusory is, 'remedy' mean positive prosecutors tempted violate softens recall measure simply extent injury physical property. care, avoid nominal damages—a penny, dollar. Are punitive possible? Perhaps. few states permit none, whatever circumstances.2 do, plaintiff will malice defendant,3 surely assume honest pursuit bears toward victim. burden carried, recovery defeated awarded.4 addition, limit actual expenses litigation. Harv.L.Rev. 113, 119—120. Others demand ratio verdict stand. Morris, Punitive Damages Tort Cases, 1173, 1180—1181. Even assuming officer, grounds home searched harbored mitigation damages. Gamble Keyes, 644, 153 888; Simpson McCaffrey, 508. bad reputation likewise admissible. Banfill Byrd, 288, actually trial, justification defense action. Pasmore hurdles these obstacles, gains substantial verdict, individual finances useless—for municipality, course, liable consent. Is surprising little actions clause? inescapable exists deter clause. excludes impress zealous prosecutor do good. point driven expected emphasize importance observing instructions police. proof efficacy needed, abundance recruit training programs in-service courses provided rule.5 Louis, example, extensive seizure, emphasis ease collapse depends unlawfully. Current digested read roll calls. pattern prevails Washington, D.C.6 Dallas, thoroughly briefed instructed detect frauds.'7 Milwaukee, stout volume arrest basis extended instruction.8 Officer preparation Jackson, lectures Associate Mississippi trainees San Antonio carefully note close statement: 'Every know Upon knowledge facts determines acquitted. you investigate remember your investigation used.' 144 York City, informed 'copies Penal Criminal Procedure' officers, 'kept advised' Baltimore, 'Digest Laws' distributed, statutory section 'is misdemeanors. appear still felonies.' Cleveland, recruits 'instructed Ohio. indicated definitely clearly belongs 'admissionist' group court.' similar emerges Birmingham, Alabama. contrast demonstration efficacy. apparent exceptions contrast—Denver, provide comprehensive series Chicago, although permits introduction not. And, determine letters, fairly uniform standard instruction cities, irrespective examples cited above serve grand assumption motivated case: area effect breach law; sanctions presently 146 decide taking poll various jurisdictions, 'test.' Today's inestimable harm cause fair cities important, perhaps, tragic judiciary. allows indeed shabby business: lawlessness law. 147 148 RUTLEDGE, 'Wisdom often never comes, ought merely comes late.' Similarly, piecemeal wisdom, hobbles truth backward glances. think guarantees carried over intact Amendment,' 124, welcome slower progress goal, finds substance 'to thus, states.' simultaneous mandate embodied states, carry sanction—exclusion taken terms—failure observe brother MURPHY'S dead letter. Twenty-nine years ago speaking Government subpoena documentary stolen, copied returned, reason procedure 'reduces version hardly rises dignity words; best pale frayed carbon copy original, bearing resemblance fulfillment heretofore 'an indispensable democratic society.' Harris 331 1098, 1106, 1399. 151 intimation could validly enact settled invalidation dual grounds, Boyd 616, 524, 746, production probative counsel—the holding 'obnoxious fourth constitution, fifth.' Id., 632, 533. Adams York, 192 597, 598, 372, 375, 575. forbids long standing firmly established. Olmstead 277 438, 462, 564, 567, 944, 376. late now. Lustig 74, 1372. powerless defiance legislators judges—if be—may lend offices seized. Compliance betokens lip service. makes illegality inarticulate premise decison. acquiesce 154 joins opinion. common provides searching Entick Carrington, Wils. 275, How.St.Tr. 1030; Grumon Raymond, 40, Am.Dec. 200; Sandford Nichols, 286, 151; Halsted Brice, 171; Hussey Davis, 317; Reed Lucas, Tex. 529; procures maliciously probable cause, Gulsby Louisville N.R. Co., 167 122, 392; Whitson May, 269; Krehbiel Henkle, 604, 945, 115, 1913B, 1156; Olson Tvete, 225, 914; Boeger Langenberg, 390, 322; Doane Anderson, Hun 586, Supplement 459; Shall Minneapolis, S.S.M.R. 649, 1151, magistrate acted jurisdiction issuing warrant, Kozak, Cir., 280 373; Kennedy Terrill, Hardin, 490; Shaw Moon, 558, 245 318, 600, persons assisting execution Hebrew Pulis, N.J.L. 621, 625, 121, L.R.A., N.S., 580, 716; Cartwright Canode, Tex.Civ.App. 792, 502, 696. One liability force resist search. E.g., Martin, 178; Mann, 45. Statutory main punishment procuring willfully exceeding exercising KF62 §§ 53a, 630, 631 (now 2234—2236); Ala.Code Ann.1940, tit. 99; Ariz.Code Ann. 44-3513 (1939); Fla.Stat.Ann. 933.16, 933.17; 751.38, 751.39 (1946), I.C.A.; Mont.Rev.Code 10948, 10952 (1935); Nev.Comp.Laws 10425, 10426 (1929); N.Y.Crim.Code 811, 812; N.Y.Penal McK.Consol.Laws, 1786, 1847; N.D.Rev.Code 12-1707, 12-1708 (1943); Okl.Stat.Ann.tit. 21, 22, 1239, 1240; Or.Comp.Laws 26—1717 (1940); S.D.Code. 13.1213, 13.1234, 34.9904, 34.9905 Tenn.Code 11905 (1934). Some statutes broadly penalize searches. 53a 2236); 17-1004, 17-1024 (1932); Minn.Stat.Ann. 613.54, 621.17; Va.Code 4822d (Michie, 1942); Wash.Rev.Stat.Ann. 2240—1, 2240—2. Virginia punishable unsupported affidavit. 4822e 1942). remedies. Ga.Code 27-301 Ill.Rev.Stat. 38, 698 (Smith-Hurd); Miss.Code 1592 (1942). misuse abuse contempt court. Mich.Stat.Ann. 27.511 (1938), Comp.Laws 1948, 605.1. 'We then, outcome resisted, sued damages, prosecuted oppression. 1846, 1847. He removal hands superiors. These consequences undisputed. add another. crim nality, procured act trespass, incompetent misconduct trespasser. 'Those (Weeks it) bind construe Constitution, Fifth Amendments, binding, merit attentive scrutiny. 'In (i.e., incompetent), unmindful argument that, unless excluded, becomes illusion. strange sound immunity viewed origin history. received English Wilkes Entick. messengers ransacked papers, recovered 4,000 1,000 other. Entick, too, verdict. public, represented juries, indifferent liberties born. so, sentiment work remedy. Other sanctions, penal disciplinary, supplementing already enumerated. No doubt greater invaded government ignore learned invasion. gained disproportionate loss On side social repressed. other, flouted insolence office. dangers choice. (People N.y. 675) strikes balance opposing interests.' pages 20, 24—25, 586 587, 588—589. point, Tables cite leading case. Pound, America (New 1930): 'Under system hard, 'getting results' puts pressure indulge lawless produces vicious circle disrespect law.' Wickersham Commission, reference arrests: '* influence likely serious trouble.' National Commission Observance Enforcement, Report Procedure (1931), Page 19. McCormick, Damages, 78. Willis, Measure Property Wrongfully Taken Private Individual, 419. 79. Fennemore Armstrong, Boyce Del. 204. almost universally accepted finding exemplary predicated damages.' L.Rev. 413, 414. overstatement. 83; Restatement Torts, 908, comment material follows gleaned Commissioners Police Chiefs twenty-six cities. Thirty-eight large selected random, inquiries directed Twenty-six replies date. Those significance mentioned text sample believed representative, substitute thoroughgoing comparison present-day procedures completely objective observer. study kind value. Assistant Superintendent Truscott's letter Washington Force January 3, 1949, McDonald 335 191. Recently discussion opinions John Polcyn notes, Foreword book, properly undertaken. fears 'losing court, neglected done full arrets, time.'

Classification Label: 0