CLINTON v. VIRGINIA, 377 U.S. 158 (1964)

U.S. Supreme Court

CLINTON v. VIRGINIA, 377 U.S. 158 (1964)

377 U.S. 158

CLINTON v. VIRGINIA.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA.
No. 294.
Argued April 27, 1964.
Decided May 4, 1964.

204 Va. 275, 130 S.E.2d 437, reversed.

Calvin H. Childress argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.

D. Gardiner Tyler, Assistant Attorney General of Virginia, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the briefs was Robert Y. Button, Attorney General of Virginia.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to strike the supplemental brief on behalf of the respondent is denied. The judgment is reversed. Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505; Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23.

MR. JUSTICE CLARK, concurring: Since the Court finds that the "spiked" mike used by the police officers penetrated petitioner's premises sufficiently to be an actual trespass thereof, I join in the judgment.

MR. JUSTICE WHITE dissents.

Page 377 U.S. 158, 159

 


U.S. Supreme Court

CLINTON v. VIRGINIA, 377 U.S. 158 (1964)

377 U.S. 158

CLINTON v. VIRGINIA.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA.
No. 294.
Argued April 27, 1964.
Decided May 4, 1964.

204 Va. 275, 130 S.E.2d 437, reversed.

Calvin H. Childress argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.

D. Gardiner Tyler, Assistant Attorney General of Virginia, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the briefs was Robert Y. Button, Attorney General of Virginia.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to strike the supplemental brief on behalf of the respondent is denied. The judgment is reversed. Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505; Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23.

MR. JUSTICE CLARK, concurring: Since the Court finds that the "spiked" mike used by the police officers penetrated petitioner's premises sufficiently to be an actual trespass thereof, I join in the judgment.

MR. JUSTICE WHITE dissents.

Page 377 U.S. 158, 159

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.