Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden Warden
Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
Bennie Joe Hayden
A police officer may seize mere evidence--evidence that is not an instrumentality of a crime, the fruits of a crime, or contraband--found in the course of a valid warrantless search conducted in a criminal suspect's home immediately after a hot pursuit of the suspect.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Franklin Goldstein, Assistant Attorney General of Maryland
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Albert R. Turnbull
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), Abe Fortas, John Marshall Harlan II, Thurgood Marshall, Potter Stewart, Earl Warren, Byron R. White
William O. Douglas
Date of Decision
29 May 1967
A police officer may seize, and the prosecution may introduce at trial, mere evidence that is found during a valid, warrantless search of a home.
- Entick v. Carrington, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (K.B. 1765).
- Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920).
- Gouled v. United States, 255 U.S. 298 (1921).
- Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257 (1960).
- Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505 (1961).
- Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966).
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967).
- Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
- Kerper, Hazel B., Introduction to the Criminal Justice System, 2nd ed. Minneapolis: West Publishing Co., 1979.
- New York Times, May 30, 1967.
- Witt, Elder, ed. Search and Seizure. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1990.
- Wesberry v. Sanders - Significance, One Person, One Vote, Further Readings
- Walz v. Tax Commission - Significance, Separation Of Church And State, Further Readings
- Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden Warden - Significance
- Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden Warden - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias