 |
| Stanford v. Texas | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued November 12, 1964 Decided January 18, 1965 | |
| Full case name | Stanford v. Texas |
| Citations | 379 U.S. 476 (more) 85 S. Ct. 506, 13 L. Ed. 2d 431, 1965 U.S. LEXIS 2380 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Cert. granted, 377 U.S. 989 (1964). |
| Holding | |
| The protections of the Fourth Amendment are by the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed against invasion by the States, and the States may not constitutionally issue general warrants which do not describe with particularity the things to be seized, a requirement of the most scrupulous exactitude where the seizure also impinges upon First Amendment freedoms. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Stewart, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution | |
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Stanford v. Texas, 379 U.S. 476 (1965), is a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. It stated in clear terms that, pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment rules regarding search and seizure applied to state governments.[1] While this principle had been outlined in other cases, such as Mapp v. Ohio, this case added another level of constitutional consideration for the issuance of search warrants when articles of expression, protected by the First Amendment, are among the items to be taken. In effect, when a state issues a warrant that includes the order to seize books, it must accord the "most scrupulous exactitude" to the language of the Fourth Amendment.
- ^ Stanford v. Texas, 379 U.S. 476 (1965).
This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
