Chambers v. Maroney
- Decided
- October 12, 1970
- Docket
- 830
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,391 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that harmless error analysis applies to erroneous admission of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment — Momon v. State (2000)
- holding that police were not required to detain car while seeking warrant to search it — United States v. Keith Rudolph Ludwig, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Amicus Curiae (1994)
- holding that if there was error in admitting ammunition seized in a search it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt — United States v. James D. Ellison, (Two Cases) (1986)
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 White delivered the opinion of the Court.
The principal question in this case concerns the admissibility of evidence seized from an automobile, in which petitioner was riding at the time of his arrest, after the automobile was taken to a police station and was there thoroughly searched without a warrant. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit found no violation of petitioner’s Fourth Amendment rights. We affirm.
[*44] I During the night of May 20, 1963, a Gulf service station in North Braddock, Pennsylvania, was robbed by two men, each of whom carried and displayed a gun. The robbers took the currency from the cash register; the service station attendant, one Stephen Kovacich, was directed to place the coins in his right-hand glove, which was then taken by the robbers. Two teen-agers, who had earlier noticed a blue compact station wagon circling the block in the vicinity of the Gulf station, then saw the station wagon speed away from a parking lot close to the Gulf station. About the same time, they learned that the Gulf station had been robbed. They reported to police, who arrived immediately, that four men were in the station wagon and one was wearing a green sweater. Kova-cich told the police that one of the men who robbed him was wearing a green sweater and the other was wearing a trench coat. A description of the car and the two robbers was broadcast over the police radio. Within an hour, a light blue compact station wagon answering the description and carrying four men was stopped by the police about two miles from the Gulf station. Petitioner was one of the men in the station wagon. He was wearing a green sweater and there was a trench coat in the car. The occupants were arrested and the car was driven to the police station. In the course of a thorough search of the car at the station, the police found concealed in a compartment under the dashboard two .38-caliber revolvers (one loaded with dumdum bullets), a right-hand glove containing small change, and certain cards bearing the name of Raymond Havicon, the attendant at a Boron service station in McKeesport, Pennsylvania, who had been robbed at gunpoint on May 13, 1963. In the course of a warrant-authorized search of petitioner’s home the day after petitioner’s arrest, police found and [*45] seized certain .38-caliber ammunition, including some dumdum bullets similar' to those found in one of the guns taken from the station wagon.
Statutes cited
Cite this
Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 (1970)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.