Minnesota v. Olson - Significance, Impact
State of Minnesota
Robert Darren Olson
It was not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment for police officers to enter a home without a warrant to arrest a murder suspect if the suspect does not have a sufficient connection with the home.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Anne E. Peek
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Glenn P. Bruder
Justices for the Court
William J. Brennan, Jr., Anthony M. Kennedy, Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)
Harry A. Blackmun, William H. Rehnquist
Date of Decision
18 April 1990
It was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment for police to enter, without a warrant, a house where a murder suspect was hiding; even though it was not the home of the suspect, the suspect had an expectation of privacy that is recognized and permitted by society.
- Jones v. United States, 326 U.S. 257 (1960).
- Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (1978).
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980).
- New York v. Harris, 495 U.S. 14 (1990).
- Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, eds. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
- Steiker, Carol S. "Counter-Revolution in Constitutional Criminal Procedure? Two Audiences, Two Answers." Michigan Law Review, August 1996, p. 2466.
- Mistretta v. United States - Significance, The Sentencing Reform Act Comes Under Challenge, "an Unusual Hybrid", Dissent: "a Sort Of Junior-varsity Congress"
- Minnesota v. Dickerson - Significance, Impact, Nightwalker Statutes, Further Readings
- Minnesota v. Olson - Significance
- Minnesota v. Olson - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias