California v. Krivda 8212 651

Decision Date24 October 1972
Docket NumberNo. 71,71
Citation409 U.S. 33,34 L.Ed.2d 45,93 S.Ct. 32
PartiesCALIFORNIA, Petitioner, v. Judith KRIVDA and Roger T. Minor. —651
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

See 409 U.S. 1068, 93 S.Ct. 549.

Russell Iungerich, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.

Roger S. Hanson, Woodland Hills, Cal., for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

On the basis of evidence obtained in a police search of respondents' trash, respondents were charged with possession of marihuana in violation of § 11530 of the California Health & Safety Code. The Supreme Court of California affirmed the superior court's judgment of dismissal and order suppressing the evidence on the grounds that, under the circumstances of this case, respondents 'had a reasonable expectation that their trash would not be rummaged through and picked over by police officers acting without a search warrant.' People v. Krivda, 5 Cal.3d 357, 366 367, 96 Cal.Rptr. 62, 68, 486 P.2d 1262, 1268 (1971) (en banc). We granted certiorari. 405 U.S. 1039, 92 S.Ct. 1307, 31 L.Ed.2d 579.

After briefing and argument, however, we are unable to determine whether the California Supreme Court based its holding upon the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, or upon the equivalent provision of the California Constitution, or both. In reaching its result in this case, the California court cited pertinent excerpts from its earlier decision in People v. Edwards, 71 Cal.2d 1096, 80 Cal.Rptr. 633, 458 P.2d 713 (1969) (en banc), which relied specifically upon both the state and federal provisions. 5 Cal.3d, at 367, 96 Cal.Rptr., at 69, 486 P.2d, at 1269. Thus, as in Department of Mental Hygiene Dept. v. Kirchner, 380 U.S. 194, 196 197, 85 S.Ct. 871, 873, 13 L.Ed.2d 753 (1965), '(w)hile we might speculate from the choice of words used in the opinion, and the authorities cited by the court, which provision was the basis for the judgment of the state court, we are unable to say with any degree of certainty that the judgment of the California Supreme Court was not based on an adequate and independent nonfederal ground.' We therefore vacate the judgment of the Supreme Court of California and remand the cause to that court for such further proceedings as may be appropriate. Department of Mental Hygiene Dept. v. Kirchner, supra; Minnesota v. National Tea Co., 309 U.S. 551, 60 S.Ct. 676, 84 L.Ed. 920 (1940); State Tax Commission of Utah v. Van Cott, 306 U.S. 511, 59 S.Ct. 605, 83 L.Ed. 950 (1939). We intimate to view on...

To continue reading

Request your trial
73 cases
  • People v. Chapman
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • April 26, 1984
    ...590; People v. Krivda (1971) 5 Cal.3d 357, 364-365, 96 Cal.Rptr. 62, 486 P.2d 1262, judgment vacated and cause remanded (1972) 409 U.S. 33, 93 S.Ct. 32, 34 L.Ed.2d 45, reiterated (1973) 8 Cal.3d 623, 105 Cal.Rptr. 521, 504 P.2d 457; see Katz v. United States (1967) 389 U.S. 347, 88 S.Ct. 50......
  • People v. Dumas
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • August 14, 1973
    ...the curb for the disposal of its contents (People v. Krivda (1971) 5 Cal.3d 357, 96 Cal.Rptr. 62, 486 P.2d 1262, vacated (1972) 409 U.S. 33, 93 S.Ct. 32, 34 L.Ed.2d 45, opinion on remand (1973) 8 Cal.3d 623, 105 Cal.Rptr. 521, 504 P.2d 457, see discussion Post).10 This category includes pla......
  • Orr v. Orr
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • March 5, 1979
    ...federal question, but to remand to the state courts for clarification as to the ground of the decision. See California v. Krivda, 409 U.S. 33, 93 S.Ct. 32, 34 L.Ed.2d 45 (1972). But there is no ambiguity here. At no time did Mrs. Orr raise the stipulation as a possible alternative ground in......
  • South Dakota v. Neville
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • February 22, 1983
    ...Variance Board v. Western Alfalfa Corp., 416 U.S. 861, 866, 94 S.Ct. 2114, 2116, 40 L.Ed.2d 607 (1974); California v. Krivda, 409 U.S. 33, 93 S.Ct. 32, 34 L.Ed.2d 45 (1972); Mental Hygiene Dept. v. Kirchner, 380 U.S. 194, 85 S.Ct. 871, 13 L.Ed.2d 753 (1965); Minnesota v. National Tea Co., 3......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • What is a search? Two conceptual flaws in Fourth Amendment doctrine and some hints of a remedy.
    • United States
    • Stanford Law Review Vol. 55 No. 1, October 2002
    • October 1, 2002
    ...that many California municipal codes prohibit anyone but a licensed trash collector from opening or hauling garbage away), vacated, 409 U.S. 33 (31.) 466 U.S. 170 (1984). (32.) Id. at 173. (33.) Id. at 177. Note that although the police did receive reports of marijuana fields prior to their......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT