Jump to content

Frank v. Maryland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Legalskeptic (talk | contribs) at 03:27, 30 September 2018 (removed link template from lead citation per WP:SCOTUS/SG; citation tweaks). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Frank v. Maryland
Argued March 5, 1959
Decided May 4, 1959
Full case nameAaron D. Frank v. State of Maryland
Citations359 U.S. 360 (more)
79 S. Ct. 804; 3 L. Ed. 2d 877
Case history
SubsequentRehearing denied, June 15, 1959.
Holding
Section 120 is valid, and appellant's conviction for resisting an inspection of his house without a warrant did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · Felix Frankfurter
William O. Douglas · Tom C. Clark
John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan Jr.
Charles E. Whittaker · Potter Stewart
Case opinions
MajorityFrankfurter
ConcurrenceWhittaker
DissentDouglas, joined by Warren, Black, Brennan
Overruled by
Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco, 387 U.S. 523 (1967)

Frank v. Maryland, 359 U.S. 360 (1959), was a United States Supreme Court case interpreting the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Frank refused to allow the health inspectors into his home citing the Fourth Amendment. Inspectors were trying to perform an administrative search for code violations, specifically a rat infestation, not a criminal investigation, so they did not believe they were violating the Fourth Amendment. The Court, in an opinion written by Felix Frankfurter, decided in favor of the inspectors claiming that the search would benefit the public more than Frank's interests in privacy.[1]

The Supreme Court would reverse this decision eight years later in Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco, 387 U.S. 523 (1967), ruling that the City of San Francisco could not prosecute a person for refusing to consent to a search of their home by a city inspector, and the inspector may only search either by having consent, or must have a search warrant issued based on probable cause of a violation of law.[2]

See also

References

  1. ^ Frank v. Maryland, 359 U.S. 360 (1959).
  2. ^ Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco, 387 U.S. 523 (1967).
  • Michener, J. (1960). "Health Inspections of Private Homes—Frank v. Maryland". Maryland Law Review. 20: 345. ISSN 0025-4282. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |month= and |coauthors= (help)
  • Schneider, Joseph J. (1961). "Constitutional Law—Search and Seizure—Duty of Home Owner to Permit Housing Inspection without a Warrant". Michigan Law Review. 59 (3): 447–450. doi:10.2307/1285791. JSTOR 1285791. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |month= and |coauthors= (help)