Misplaced Pages

United States v. Salvucci (1980)

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
1980 United States Supreme Court case
United States v. Salvucci
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 26, 1980
Decided June 25, 1980
Full case nameUnited States v. John Salvucci
Citations448 U.S. 83 (more)
Case history
PriorUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLANT, v. JOHN M. SALVUCCI, JR., JOSEPH G. Zackular, 1979 United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit 599 F.2d at 1098
SubsequentReversed and remanded
Holding
Mere possession of a seized good during an illegal search does not automatically entitle a person to file a Fourth Amendment deprivation claim.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
MajorityRehnquist, joined by Stevens, White, Stewart, Powell, Burger, Blackmun
DissentMarshall, joined by Brennan
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings
Jones v. United States (1960)

United States v. Salvucci 448 U.S. 83 (1980) was a Supreme Court case ruling that "automatic standing" to file a Fourth Amendment claim based on mere possession of a seized item lacks constitutional merit.

Background

In 1978, John Salvucci and Joseph Zackular were federally indicted on 12 counts of stolen mail possession. They filed a motion to suppress the checks during trial, arguing the affidavit supporting the search warrant lacked probable cause. The District Court agreed; the Court of Appeals upheld the suppression order based on the defendants' standing.

Decision

In a 7-2 majority opinion delivered by Justice William Rehnquist, the Court ruled that simple possession of a seized item does not justify standing by itself. Instead, those who have "a legitimate expectation of privacy in the invaded place" possess merit to file a Fourth Amendment claim.

Marshall's Dissent

Justice Thurgood Marshall, joined by Justice Brennan, posits that the automatic standing rule eliminates the "wasteful" requirement of pretrial preliminary standing hearings in possession cases.

References

  1. United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83 (1980)
  2. Operation of the Rule: Standing
  3. 18 U.S. Code ยง 1708 - Theft or receipt of stolen mail matter generally
  4. United States v. Salvucci First Circuit, 1979

External links

United States Fourth Amendment case law
Scope of the Fourth Amendment
Definition of search
Open-fields doctrine
Aerial surveillance
Third-party doctrine
Definition of seizure
Fourth Amendment standing
Probable cause
Reasonable suspicion: Investigative detentions and frisks
Warrant requirement
Mere evidence rule
Neutral and detached magistrate
Warrants directed at third parties
Knock-and-announce
Exceptions to warrant requirement
Exigent circumstances
Consent searches
Plain view
Vehicle searches
Searches incident to arrest
Breathalyzers, blood samples, DNA
Protective sweeps
Inventory searches
Border searches
Checkpoints
Students, employees, and patients
Property of probationers and parolees
Administrative inspections
Searches in jails and prisons
Warrantless arrests
Seizures
Distinguishing stops and arrests
Seizure of premises awaiting warrant
Detention incident to search
Detention during vehicle stop
Excessive force
Remedies
Exclusionary rule
Origins
Impeachment exception
Good-faith exception
Independent source
Inevitable discovery
Attenuation
No-knock searches
Habeas corpus review
Civil suit
Federal
State
Incorporation against States
Unreasonable search and seizure
Warrant requirements
Categories: