less than 1 minute read

Linkletter v. Walker

Significance, Impact, Retroactivity

Petitioner

Victor Linkletter

Respondent

Victor G. Walker

Petitioner's Claim

Evidence obtained as a result of unreasonable search and seizure should be found inadmissible under the Fourth Amendment under Mapp v. Ohio.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Euel A. Screws, Jr.

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Teddy W. Airhart, Jr.

Justices for the Court

William J. Brennan, Jr., Tom C. Clark (writing for the Court), Arthur Goldberg, John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Stewart, Earl Warren, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

Hugo Lafayette Black, William O. Douglas

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

7 June 1965

Decision

In the Constitution there are no circumstances that require retroactive implementation of the exclusionary rule.

Related Cases

  • Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914).
  • Wolf v. People of the State of Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 (1949).
  • Reck v. Pate, 367 U.S. 433 (1961).
  • Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).
  • Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963).

Sources

West's Encyclopedia of American Law. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 1998.

Further Readings

  • Hall, Kermit L., ed. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1963 to 1972