Jones v. United States
- Decided
- March 28, 1960
- Docket
- 69
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,796 timesOverruled (verified)Overruled by United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83 (1980) (verified: Constitution Annotated, Library of Congress) · United States v. Salvucci
What later courts said
- holding that affidavits containing hearsay not insufficient if a substantial basis exists for crediting hearsay — United States v. Capozzi (1999)
- holding that affidavits containing hearsay are not insufficient if a substantial basis exists for crediting hearsay — United States v. Capozzi (2000)
- holding that a guest staying temporarily in a friend’s apartment had standing to challenge the search of that apartment — United States v. Scurry (2012)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Justice Frankfurter delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a prosecution for violation of federal narcotics laws. In the first count of a two-count indictment petitioner was charged with having “purchased, sold, dispensed and distributed” narcotics in violation of 26 U. S. C. § 4704 (a), that is, not in or from the “original stamped package.” In the second count petitioner was charged under 21 U. S. C. § 174 with having “facilitated the concealment and sale of” the same narcotics, knowing them to have been imported illegally into the United States. Petitioner was found guilty on both counts and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. The Court of Appeals, one judge dissenting, affirmed the conviction. 104 U. S. App. D. C. 345, 262 F. 2d 234. Since the case presented important questions in the administration of criminal justice, more particularly a defendant’s standing to challenge the legality of a search in the circumstances of this case, as well as the legality of the particular search should standing be established, we granted certiorari. 359 U. S. 988.
Both statutory provisions under which petitioner was prosecuted permit conviction upon proof of the defendant’s possession of narcotics, and in the case of 26 U. S. C. § 4704 (a) of the absence of the appropriate stamps. Possession was the basis of the Government’s case against petitioner. The evidence against him may be briefly summarized. He was arrested in an apartment in the District of Columbia by federal narcotics officers, who [*259] were executing a warrant to search for narcotics. Those officers found narcotics, without appropriate stamps, and narcotics paraphernalia in a bird’s nest in an awning just outside a window in the apartment. Another officer, stationed outside the building, had a short time before seen petitioner put his hand on the awning. Upon the discovery of the narcotics and the paraphernalia petitioner had admitted to the officers that some of these were his and that he was living in the apartment.
Statutes cited
- 26 U.S.C. § 4704
- 21 U.S.C. § 174
- 18 U.S.C. § 3109
Cite this
Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257 (1960)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.