Warden v. Hayden | |
---|---|
Argued April 12, 1967 Decided May 29, 1967 | |
Full case name | Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden |
Citations | 387 U.S. 294 (more) 87 S. Ct. 1642; 18 L. Ed. 2d 782 |
Case history | |
Prior | Defendant convicted; conviction reversed on appeal, Hayden v. Warden, 363 F.2d 647 (4th Cir. 1966); cert. granted, 385 U.S. 926 (1966). |
Subsequent | Conviction upheld |
Holding | |
The distinction prohibiting seizure of items of only evidential value and allowing seizure of instrumentalities, fruits, or contraband is no longer accepted as being required by the Fourth Amendment | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Brennan, joined by Clark, Harlan, Stewart, White |
Concurrence | Black |
Concurrence | Fortas, joined by Warren |
Dissent | Douglas |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. IV | |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
Gouled v. United States (1921) |
Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294 (1967), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that 'mere evidence' may be seized and held as evidence in a trial, allowing such evidence obtained in a search to be used. This finding reversed previous Supreme Court decisions such as Boyd v. United States which had held that search warrants may not be used as a means of gaining access to a man's house or office and papers solely for the purpose of making search to secure evidence to be used against him in a criminal or penal proceeding...[1]