Kremen v. United States

353 U.S. 346
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedMay 13, 1957
DocketNo. 162
StatusPublished
Cited by126 cases

This text of 353 U.S. 346 (Kremen v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kremen v. United States, 353 U.S. 346 (1957).

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Of petitioners’ various contentions we find the one relating to the validity of the search and seizure made by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation disposi-tive of this case, and we therefore need not consider the others.

The indictment charged the three petitioners with relieving, comforting, and assisting one Thompson, a fugitive from justice, in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 3, and with conspiring to commit that offense in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 371. In addition, it charged petitioners Kremen and [347]*347Coleman with harboring Steinberg, also a fugitive from justice, and with conspiring to commit that offense. Petitioners were found guilty, and on appeal their convictions were sustained, one judge dissenting. 231 F. 2d 155. Because of the unusual character of the search and seizure here involved, we granted certiorari, without, however, limiting the writ. 352 U. S. 819.

Thompson and Steinberg had been fugitives from justice for about two years when agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation discovered them, in the company of Kremen, Coleman and another, at a secluded cabin near the village of Twain Harte, California. After keeping the cabin under surveillance for some 24 hours, the officers arrested the three petitioners and Thompson. Thompson and Steinberg were arrested outside the cabin; Kremen and Coleman, inside. The agents possessed outstanding arrest warrants for Thompson and Steinberg, but none for Kremen and Coleman. These four individuals were searched and documents found on their persons were seized. In addition, an exhaustive search of the cabin and a seizure of its entire contents were made shortly after the arrests. The agents possessed no search warrant. The property seized from the house was taken to the F. B. I. office at San Francisco for further examination. A copy of the F. B. I.’s inventory of the property thus taken is printed in the appendix to this opinion, post, p. 349.

The majority of the Court are agreed that objections to the validity of the search and seizure were adequately raised and preserved. The seizure of the entire contents of the house and its removal some two hundred miles away to the F. B. I. offices for the purpose of examination are beyond the sanction of any of our cases. While the evidence seized from the persons of the petitioners might have been legally admissible, the introduction against each of petitioners of some items seized in the [348]*348house in the manner aforesaid rendered the guilty verdicts illegal. The convictions must therefore be reversed, with instructions to grant the petitioners a new trial.

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Haitao Xiang
67 F.4th 895 (Eighth Circuit, 2023)
State v. M. Zeimer
2022 MT 96 (Montana Supreme Court, 2022)
United States v. Howard Cotterman
709 F.3d 952 (Ninth Circuit, 2013)
United States v. Cotterman
637 F.3d 1068 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Seljan
Ninth Circuit, 2008
Hudson v. Michigan
547 U.S. 586 (Supreme Court, 2006)
Locks v. Three Unidentified Customs Service Agents
759 F. Supp. 1131 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1990)
Bass v. State
732 S.W.2d 632 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1987)
United States v. Hubbard
493 F. Supp. 209 (District of Columbia, 1979)
State v. Schrader
244 N.W.2d 498 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1976)
State v. Patterson
220 N.W.2d 235 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1974)
United States v. Matlock
415 U.S. 164 (Supreme Court, 1974)
Bryant v. State
299 N.E.2d 200 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1973)
United States v. Joseph A. Bozada
473 F.2d 389 (Eighth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Kroll
351 F. Supp. 148 (W.D. Missouri, 1973)
United States v. Lowell M. Birrell
470 F.2d 113 (Second Circuit, 1972)
United States v. Smollar
357 F. Supp. 628 (S.D. New York, 1972)
Phenix v. State
488 S.W.2d 759 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
353 U.S. 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kremen-v-united-states-scotus-1957.