Common v. Mississippi, 85-8
Decision Date | 12 November 1985 |
Docket Number | No. 85-8,85-8 |
Citation | 474 U.S. 984,88 L.Ed.2d 345,106 S.Ct. 393 |
Parties | Jerry McCOMMON v. MISSISSIPPI |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
On petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi.
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
It is well recognized that the Fourth Amendment "imposes substantive standards for searches and seizures; but with them one of the important safeguards it establishes is a procedure; and [that] central to this procedure is an independent control over the actions of officers effecting searches of private premises." Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 251-252, 80 S.Ct. 683, 703-704, 4 L.Ed.2d 668 (1960) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting). Thus this Court has long insisted that the determination whether probable cause exists to support a search warrant be made by "a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 14, 68 S.Ct. 367, 369, 92 L.Ed. 436 (1948) (emphasis added). See also United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 913-914, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 3416-3417, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984); Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 240, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 2333, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983); Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New York, 442 U.S. 319, 326-327, 99 S.Ct. 2319, 2324, 60 L.Ed.2d 920 (1979); United States v. Chadwick, 433 U.S. 1, 9, 97 S.Ct. 2476, 2482, 53 L.Ed.2d 538 (1977); Shadwick v. City of Tampa, 407 U.S. 345, 350, 92 S.Ct. 2119, 2122, 32 L.Ed.2d 783 (1972); Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 450, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 2029, 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 111, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 1512, 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964); Giordenello v. United States, 357 U.S. 480, 486, 78 S.Ct. 1245, 1250, 2 L.Ed.2d 1503 (1958); United States v. Lefkowitz, 285 U.S. 452, 464, 52 S.Ct. 420, 423, 76 L.Ed. 877 (1932). Just two Terms ago in United States v. Leon, supra, the Court vigorously reaffirmed that the probable-cause decision must be made by a neutral and detached magistrate, stating that "the courts must . . . insist that the magistrate purport to 'perform his "neutral and detached" function and not serve merely as a rubber stamp for the police.' " Id., 468 U.S., at 914, 104 S.Ct., at 3417 (quoting Aguilar v. Texas, supra, 378 U.S., at 111, 84 S.Ct., at 1512). And, as we explained in Shadwick v. City of Tampa, supra, 407 U.S., at 350, 92 S.Ct., at 2123, "[w]hatever else neutrality and detach- ment might entail, it is clear that they require severance and disengagement from activities of law enforcement." Today the Court refuses to act on its convictions, denying certiorari in a case in which the judge who issued the search warrant indisputably "rubber-stamped" the police request.
In this case, a large quantity of marijuana was discovered in the trunk of petitioner's automobile when it was searched pursuant to a warrant. Petitioner challenged the validity of the warrant at a pretrial suppression hearing, arguing that it was not supported by probable cause. The judge who granted the warrant testified at the hearing. With remarkable candor, he explained that he had relied principally on the fact that police officers had asked for the warrant, rather than on the underlying facts and circumstances set forth in the affidavit. The pertinent portion of the judge's testimony on cross-examination follows:
The trial court rejected petitioner's arguments and admitted the evidence. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed petitioner's conviction, holding both that the warrant was supported by probable cause and that the conduct of the judge who signed the warrant, although not a model of judicial deportment, had satisfied the constitutional requirements of detachment and neutrality. 467 So.2d 940 (1985).
Respondent argues before this Court that even if the judge failed to evaluate the request for the warrant in a neutral and detached fashion, the warrant was nonetheless valid because it was, in fact, supported by probable cause.* This attempt to evade review of the judge's lack of independence should not succeed. In Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S., at 450-451, 91 S.Ct., at 2029-2030, we firmly rejected the argument that "the existence of probable cause renders noncompliance with the warrant procedure an irrelevance." Indeed, in Coolidge the Court declared that because the warrant was not issued by "the neutral and detached magistrate required by the Constitution, the search stands on no firmer ground than if there had been no warrant at all." Id., at 453, 91 S.Ct., at 2031.
As the transcript of the suppression hearing clearly demonstrates, the judge who issued the warrant to search petitioner's automobile, although formally separate from law enforcement officials, viewed himself as a facilitator of police investigations and simply acquiesced in police requests, without giving serious and independent consideration to the facts set forth in supporting affidavits. The Court's failure to grant certiorari in this case suggests that our admonitions that probable cause must be determined by a neutral and detached magistrate are hollow pronouncements.
I...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Polk v. State, 90-KA-0308
..."discuss it pretty thoroughly." 101 L.Ed.2d 895 (1988); McCommon v. State, 467 So.2d 940 (Miss.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 984, 106 S.Ct. 393, 88 L.Ed.2d 345 (1985); Birchfield v. State, 412 So.2d 1181 The record shows that the chief went to the mayor's house at 10:00 p.m., told Mayor Bee......
-
Stringer v. State
...request for a warrant in McCommon v. State, 467 So.2d 940, 942-45 (Miss.1985), cert. den. --- U.S. ----, ----, 106 S.Ct. 393, 394-96, 88 L.Ed.2d 345, 346-88 (1985) (Brennan, J., dissenting).8 The Supreme Court of the United States has recently recognized an exception, not relevant here, to ......
-
Bevill v. State
...v. State, 517 So.2d 1317, 1322-1323 (Miss.1987); McCommon v. State, 467 So.2d 940, 942 (Miss.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 984, 106 S.Ct. 393, 88 L.Ed.2d 345 (1985). In deference to the circuit judge, however, we must state that in a case of this magnitude and importance, a circuit judge wo......
-
Abram v. State
...Speights failed to act as a neutral and detached magistrate. McCommon v. State, 467 So.2d 940 (Miss.1985), cert. denied 474 U.S. 984, 106 S.Ct. 393, 88 L.Ed.2d 345 (1985) offers an ample statement of the law: Both the United States Supreme Court and this Court have held that the individual ......
-
Why so contrived? Fourth Amendment balancing, per se rules, and DNA databases after Maryland v. King.
...and seizures through the warrant procedure."). (142) This would be the position of a Total Warrantist. See, e.g., McCommon v. Mississippi, 474 U.S. 984, 986 n.* (1985) (Brennan, J., dissenting from the denial of petition for writ of certiorari) (referring in a footnote to "[his] view that a......