Other Free Encyclopedias :: Law Library - American Law and Legal Information :: Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988
 

United States v. Leon - Significance, Further Readings

Petitioner

United States

Respondent

Alberto Antonio Leon

Petitioner's Claim

Evidence obtained through use of a search warrant subsequently judged to be defective should be admissible in court.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Rex E. Lee, U.S. Solicitor General

Chief Lawyers for Respondent

Barry Tarlow, Roger L. Cossack

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)

Justices Dissenting

William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

5 July 1984

Decision

Evidence obtained under a search warrant subsequently ruled defective may still be admissible in court.

Related Cases

  • Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).
  • Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).
  • Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964).
  • Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 (1969).
  • Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222 (1971).
  • Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983).

Additional Topics

United States v. Leon - Further Readings

United States v. Leon - Significance

Defendants must establish that either the magistrate issuing a search warrant, or the police officers that submit an affidavit establishing probable cause to obtain a search warrant, did not act in good faith to make evidence obtained under a warrant subsequently deemed defective inadmissible in court. Public concern over the use of, and traffic in, illegal drugs reached new levels in the early 19…

Massachusetts v. Sheppard - Significance, The Court Applies The Good Faith Rule, Excluded Evidence Can Still Be Used In Court [next] [back] Hudson v. Palmer - Significance, Impact, Do Prison Inmates Have Rights?

User Comments Add a comment…