United States v. Calandra
Significance, Exclusionary Rule's Prime Purpose, Better For Some Guilty People To Go Free
A witness summoned before a grand jury should not be excused from testifying because the questions are based on evidence gathered during an unlawful search and seizure.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Louis F. Claiborne
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Robert J. Rotatori
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F., Powell, Jr. (writing for the Court), William H. Rehnquist, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall
Date of Decision
8 January 1974
Reversed the decisions of a district court and court of appeals and held that a grand jury witness may not refuse to answer questions on the grounds that they are based on evidence gained through unlawful search and seizure.
- Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914).
- Gelbard v. United States, 408 U.S. 41 (1972).
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984).
- Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (1995).
- Johnson, John W., ed. Historic U.S. Court Cases, 1690-1990: An Encyclopedia. New York: Garland Publishing, 1992.
- Lieberman, Jethro K. The Evolving Constitution. New York: Random House, 1992.
- Schwartz, Herman, ed. The Burger Years: Rights and Wrongs in the Supreme Court, 1969-1986. New York: Viking, 1987.
- United States v. Edwards - Significance, Impact
- United Jewish Organizations v. Carey - Significance, Points Of Affirmation, Impact, Further Readings
- United States v. Calandra - Significance
- United States v. Calandra - Exclusionary Rule's Prime Purpose
- United States v. Calandra - Better For Some Guilty People To Go Free
- United States v. Calandra - Even Larger Exceptions To The Exclusionary Rule
- Other Free Encyclopedias