LOCATION:Hishon & King Atlanta Office
DOCKET NO.: 82-5298
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1981-1986)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
CITATION: 468 US 796 (1984)
ARGUED: Nov 09, 1983
DECIDED: Jul 05, 1984
Mr. Andrew L. Frey – on behalf of the Respondent
Peter J. Fabricant – on behalf of the Petitioner
Facts of the case
A group of people working in New York was suspected of illegal drug trafficking. In this case, the plaintiff Segura and his accomplices were subjected to a search for narcotic substances. The search was carried out in two stages. At the first stage, the authorized bodies searched and found narcotic substances having the authority only to visit the premises. The collected evidence was submitted to the court, but the court found that they had been received illegally, and therefore can not be taken into account when considering the case. The court relied on the provision of the Constitution on the inviolability of private property without sufficient grounds and permissive documents. At the second stage of the investigation, the search was carried out already in the presence of a corresponding warrant.
This decision allowed to legislatively delineating the powers of the police at the entrance to the premises, even if it is suspected that illegal substances are in it or people who are in it may be involved in illegal activities. Thus, the court clearly delineated the permission to enter the premises and the permit to search the premises, having established that in the first case the search can not be made, whereas the second case implies permission to enter and search the premises simultaneously. In solving this case, the court relied only on recollected evidence, thereby creating an additional precedent on the admissibility of evidence.