United States v. Van Leeuwen, 403
Court | United States Supreme Court |
Writing for the Court | DOUGLAS |
Citation | 25 L.Ed.2d 282,397 U.S. 249,90 S.Ct. 1029 |
Parties | UNITED STATES, Petitioner, v. Gerritt Johannes VAN LEEUWEN |
Docket Number | No. 403,403 |
Decision Date | 23 March 1970 |
Solicitor Gen., Erwin N. Griswold, for petitioner.
Craig G. Davis for respondent.
Respondent, at about 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 28, 1968, mailed two 12-pound packages at the post office in Mt. Vernon, Washington, a town some 60 miles from the Canadian border. One package was addressed to a post office box in Van Nuys, California, and the other to a post office box in Nashville, Tennessee. Respondent declared they contained coins. Each pack- age was to be sent airmail registered and each was insured for $10,000, a type of mailing that the parties agree was first class, making them not subject to discretionary inspection.1
When the postal clerk told a policeman who happened to be present that he was suspicious of the packages, the policeman at once noticed that the return address on the packages was a vacant housing area of a nearby junior college, and that the license plates of respondent's car were British Columbia. The policeman called the Canadian police, who called customs in Seattle. At 3 o'clock that afternoon customs called Van Nuys and learned that the addressee of one package was under investigation in Van Nuys for trafficking in illegal coins. Due to the time differential, Seattle customs was unable to reach Nashville until the following morning, March 29, when Seattle was advised that the second addressee was also being investigated for the same crime. A customs official in Seattle thereupon filed an affidavit for a search warrant for both packages with a United States commissioner, who issued the search warrant at 4 p.m., and it was executed in Mt. Vernon at 6:30 p.m., 2 1/2 hours later. Thereupon the packages were opened, inspected, resealed and promptly sent on their way.
Other evidence showed that respondent had brought the two packages in from Canada without declaring them. He was tried for illegally importing gold coins in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 545 and found guilty and sentenced and fined. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the coins were improperly admitted in evidence because a timely warrant had not been obtained. 414 F.2d 758. The case is here on a petition for a writ of certiorari, 396 U.S. 885, 90 S.Ct. 175, 24 L.Ed.2d 160. We reverse.
It has long been held that first-class mail such as letters and sealed packages subject to letter postage—as distinguished from newspapers, magazines, pamphlets, and other printed matter—is free from inspection by postal authorities, except in the manner provided by the Fourth Amendment. As stated in Ex parte Jackson, 96 U.S. 727, 733, 24 L.Ed. 877, decided in 1878:
The course of events since 1878 has underlined the relevance and importance of the Post Office to our constitutional rights. Mr. Justice Holmes in United States ex rel. Milwaukee Social Democratic Pub. Co. v. Burleson, 255 U.S. 407, 437, 41 S.Ct. 352, 363, 65 L.Ed. 704 (dissenting opinion), said that 'the use of the mails is almost as much a part of free speech as the right to use our tongues.' We have emphasized over and over again that while Congress may classify the mail and fix the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Baker, Cr. 7920
...arrest." (Terry v. Ohio (1968) 392 U.S. 1, 22, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1880, 20 L.Ed.2d 889. See also, United States v. Van Leeuwen (1970) 397 U.S. 249, 251-253, 90 S.Ct. 1029, 25 L.Ed.2d 282, 285-286; People v. Mickelson (1963) 59 Cal.2d 448, 450-451, 30 Cal.Rptr. 18, 380 P.2d 658; People v. Barret......
-
State v. Matthews, Cr. N
...(United States v. Brown, Supra), and to contents of packages shipped through the United States mails (United States v. Van Leeuwen, 397 U.S. 249, 90 S.Ct. 1029, 25 L.Ed.2d 282 (1970)). In the last case, the distiction was made between first-class mail such as letters and sealed packages sub......
-
US v. Conley
...2586, 61 L.Ed.2d 235 (1979); United States v. Chadwick, 433 U.S. 1 97 S.Ct. 2476, 53 L.Ed.2d 538 (1977); United States v. Van Leeuwen, 397 U.S. 249 90 S.Ct. 1029, 25 L.Ed.2d 282 (1970); Ex parte Jackson, 96 U.S. 727, 733 24 L.Ed. 877 (1878), or one of the well-delineated exceptions to the w......
-
U.S. v. Christie, Criminal No. 07-332 (HAA).
...warrant, they do not violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable seizures."); see also United States v. Van Leeuwen, 397 U.S. 249, 253, 90 S.Ct. 1029, 25 L.Ed.2d 282 (1970) (cited favorably in McArthur for its holding that a 29-hour detention of a mailed package was rea......
-
Fourth amendment primer
...Walter v. United States , 447 U.S. 649, 657 (1980). • Mail and packages, including by private carriers. United States v. Van Leeuwen , 397 U.S. 249 (1970); Walter v. United States , supra. • Bodily fluid samples, such as blood or urine. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives’ Ass’n ., 489 U.S.......
-
Special needs' and other fourth amendment searches
...§233.3(g). The courts have extended the same protection to packages sent through the U.S. Postal Service. United States v. Van Leeuwen , 397 U.S. 249 (1970). Police may not search letters and packages without a warrant; however, they may hold these for a reasonable amount of time to procure......
-
The Supreme Court of the United States, 1969-1970
...a search warrantcannot be said to be &dquo;unreasonable&dquo; within the meaning of the Fourth Amend-ment. United States v. Van Leeuwan, 397 U.S. 249; 90 S. Ct. 1029. Opinion byJustice Douglas. Vote: Where the defendant was arrested on the street just outside his home, under the Fourth Amen......