Browse by Grade Level |
|
|
Browse by Subject |
|
|
Essay Forums |
|
| |
|
Supreme Court Decisions
· In the case of: Kyllo v. United States. A Department of the
Interior agent, suspicious that Danny Kyllo was growing marijuana, used a
thermal-imaging device to scan his triplex. Question: Does the use of a
thermal-imaging device to detect relative amounts of heat emanating from a
private home constitute an unconstitutional search in violation of the
Fourth Amendment? Yes. In a 5-4. Souter vote won.
· In the case of: United States v. Knights: A California court
sentenced Mark James Knights to probation for a drug offense. Question:
Does a search pursuant to a common California probation condition,
supported by reasonable suspicion, satisfy the Fourth Amendment? Answer:
Yes. Voting is not yet known
· In the case of: Charles Wilson challenged the
constitutionality of an arrest procedure conducted by federal and state
authorities who sought to apprehend his son. Question: Is the
accompaniment of law enforcement authorities by media personnel, during
the execution of an arrest warrant in a home, a violation of the
homeowner's Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful search and
seizure? Answer: Yes. In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that the
presence of media during the execution of an arrest warrant in a home was
in no way related to the officers' task at hand. Souter’s vote won
· In the case of: Minnesota v. Carter: Wayne Thomas Carter, Melvin
Johns, and Kimberly Thompson were arrested after a police officer observed
them through a window bagging cocaine in Thompson's apartment. Question:
In accordance with the Fourth Amendment, do household visitors have the
same protection against unreasonable searches and seizures as do residents
or overnight social guests? Answer: No, Souter vote did not win
· In 1992, Sharlene Wilson sold illicit narcotics to undercover
agents of the Arkansas state police. Question: Does the Fourth Amendment's
reasonable search and seizure clause require police officers to knock and
announce their presence before entering a private residence? Answer: Yes.
A unanimous Court held that the common-law "knock-and announce" principle
forms a part of the Fourth Amendment reasonableness inquiry. Souter’s vote
won
A man of unusual and peculiar sensibilities, David H. Souter came to
the Supreme Court as a complete enigma. Souter, who received his
nomination to the Court from President George Bush only months after his
promotion to a federal appeals court, lacked a public reputation. As a
result, the press labeled him the "stealth justice," an unknown judge with
uncertain values. Conservatives praised Souter as a restrained jurist and
predicted that he would bolster the right-wing bloc of Antonin Scalia and
William H. Rehnquist. The Bush White House assured the Republican far
right that Souter would be a "home run." Liberals, on the other hand,
hoped secretly that the Bush nominee would fail in expectations and emerge
as a surprise to his sponsors. To this day, Souter has avoided validating
either camp. The Free Congress Foundation, an organization dedicated to
coordinating support for conservative nominees, has called their
optimistic predictions "miserably inaccurate." The Women's Legal Defense
Fund, a liberal group for the advancement of women's rights, staged
protests at various times against Souter and has expressed dismay at his
votes. The unhappiness of both political extremes speaks volumes of the
quirky justice. To this day, Souter has demonstrated a moderate
jurisprudence though he has not appeared afraid to wander deep into either
camp along the political spectrum. Court watchers continue to be amused by
Souter's eccentric habits and behaviors. David Hackett Souter was born
in Melrose, Massachusetts, on September 17, 1939. Although Souter grew up
with his parents, Joseph and Helen, in Massachusetts, he spent many of his
summers at his maternal grandparent's farm in Weare, New Hampshire.
Souter's grandparents passed away when he was eleven and his family
decided to move to the farm. Since then, Souter has claimed Weare as his
home. Souter's father worked as a banker in the nearby state capital of
Concord. He passed away in 1976, survived by Souter and his mother who
still resides in a retirement community close to the Souter farm.
Souter attended a local public school where his teachers immediately
recognized the great intelligence of their young student. His parents sent
Souter to Concord High School where he excelled. His classmates voted him,
upon graduation, the "most sophisticated" and "most likely to succeed."
After high school, Souter attended Harvard University where he continued
to enjoy academic success. He graduated magna cum laude in 1961 and was
elected to Phi Beta Kappa. The recipient of a Rhodes scholarship to attend
Oxford, Souter spent the next two years earning his bachelor's and
master's degrees in jurisprudence from Magdalen College. Souter returned
to the United States in 1963 to study law at Harvard. After law
school, Souter went back to his home and accepted a position with the
Concord law firm of Orr & Reno. Souter based his decision on his
previous experience there as a summer clerk and his desire to remain close
to home. At Orr & Reno, Souter practiced a wide variety of law ranging
from corporate law to general litigation. He also began participation in
various civic activities that would eventually lead to trusteeships in
both the Concord Hospital and the New Hampshire Historical Society.
Souter's activism in civic activities encouraged him to seek a wider role
in public service. His colleagues at his firm observed that he seemed
discontent with private practice. Thus, Souter eagerly accepted a position
offered by the attorney general of New Hampshire in 1968. Souter began
as an assistant attorney general in the criminal division, but his talents
quickly propelled him to higher office. When Warren Rudman became attorney
general of New Hampshire, in 1971, he picked Souter as his assistant.
Souter earned Rudman's admiration and respect. When Rudman resigned from
office a few years later, New Hampshire's Governor Meldrin Thompson
appointed Souter to the top job. As attorney general for New Hampshire,
Souter fought a gambling legalization movement in the state as well as
protests against a nuclear power plant. Souter became a judge after
two years of service as the attorney general. Since New Hampshire's trial
court did not reside in any permanent seat, Souter and his fellow judges
traveled the state's ten counties. This experience exposed Souter to a
wide variety of cases and situations. Most of the cases that came before
him dealt with criminal matters and he soon gained a tough-on-crime
reputation. Still, his fairness and intelligence won him praise even from
defense attorneys. Governor John Sununu promoted Souter to the New
Hampshire Supreme Court in 1983. Souter quickly established himself as a
knowledgeable jurist and an independent thinker. President Bush appointed
Souter to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 1990. Justice William J. Brennan
retired five months later, however, and Bush decided to move Souter up
again. Although Sununu and Rudman, , denied involvement in Souter's
nomination, Souter's friendship with both no doubt helped his cause. The
ever-unassuming Souter had to be reassured by Rudman that, in light of all
the qualified candidates available, an interview with Bush was really
necessary. Souter's nomination passed nearly unopposed through the Senate.
Souter's first year on the Court was undistinguished. He wrote few
opinions and did not display many hints of his judicial predisposition.
Since then, he has appeared more comfortable on the Court. He has settled
into the moderate camp of the Court as evidenced by his unprecedented 24
similar votes with the centrist Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Together with
O'Connor and Kennedy, Souter has formed a moderate bloc in the Court that
prevents domination from the conservative wing. Souter's engaging
personality explains his quick friendship with fellow justices. As one of
the few people unoffended by Scalia's verbal argumentation style, Souter
has become a good friend with the conservative justice despite the fact
that they often clash on controversial issues. Souter has maintained his
simple, bachelor lifestyle. He brings his own lunch, consisting of apples
and yogurt, to work everyday and lives in an undecorated apartment. He
still returns home to Weare during the summer breaks where he climbs the
local mountains and visits his mother. http://www.oyez.org/cases/cases.cgi?mode=subjects&command=do_search&andor=any&KEYWORDS=Criminal+procedure%3A+search+and+seizure%2C+other
|
|
|