Silverman v. United States

Last updated
Silverman v. United States
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued December 5, 1960
Decided March 6, 1961
Full case nameSilverman v. United States
Citations 365 U.S. 505 ( more )
81 S. Ct. 679; 5 L. Ed. 2d 734; 1961 U.S. LEXIS 1605; 97 A.L.R.2d 1277
Prior history Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Holding
A federal officer may not, without warrant, physically entrench into a person's office or home to secretly observe or listen and relate at the man's subsequent criminal trial what was seen or heard.
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
Majority Stewart, joined unanimously
Concurrence Douglas, joined by Clark, Whittaker
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. IV

Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505 (1961), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that a federal officer may not, without warrant, physically place themselves into the space of a person's office or home to secretly observe or listen and relate at the man's subsequent criminal trial what was seen or heard.

Supreme Court of the United States highest court in the United States

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. Established pursuant to Article III of the U.S. Constitution in 1789, it has original jurisdiction over a small range of cases, such as suits between two or more states, and those involving ambassadors. It also has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all federal court and state court cases that involve a point of federal constitutional or statutory law. The Court has the power of judicial review, the ability to invalidate a statute for violating a provision of the Constitution or an executive act for being unlawful. However, it may act only within the context of a case in an area of law over which it has jurisdiction. The Court may decide cases having political overtones, but it has ruled that it does not have power to decide nonjusticiable political questions. Each year it agrees to hear about 100–150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review.

<i>United States Reports</i> official record of the rulings, orders, case tables, and other proceedings of the Supreme Court of the United States

The United States Reports are the official record of the rulings, orders, case tables, in alphabetical order both by the name of the petitioner and by the name of the respondent, and other proceedings of the Supreme Court of the United States. United States Reports, once printed and bound, are the final version of court opinions and cannot be changed. Opinions of the court in each case are prepended with a headnote prepared by the Reporter of Decisions, and any concurring or dissenting opinions are published sequentially. The Court's Publication Office oversees the binding and publication of the volumes of United States Reports, although the actual printing, binding, and publication are performed by private firms under contract with the United States Government Publishing Office.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

Related Research Articles

Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the constitutionality of several Pennsylvania state statutory provisions regarding abortion were challenged. The Court's plurality opinion reaffirmed the central holding of Roe v. Wade stating that "matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment."

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Supreme Court unanimously struck down St. Paul's Bias-Motivated Crime Ordinance and reversed the conviction of a teenager, referred to in court documents only as R.A.V., for burning a cross on the lawn of an African-American family for violating the First Amendment's protections for freedom of speech.

United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, 529 U.S. 803 (2000), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court struck down Section 505 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which required that cable television operators completely scramble or block channels that are "primarily dedicated to sexually-oriented programming" from 10 pm to 6 am.

Silverman may refer to:

Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), was a United States Supreme Court case that considered the application of federal civil rights law to constitutional violations by city employees. The case was significant because it held that 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a statutory provision from 1871, could be used to sue state officers who violated a plaintiff's constitutional rights. § 1983 had previously been a relatively obscure and little-used statute, but since Monroe it has become a central part of United States civil rights law.

Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a criminal defendant cannot make peremptory challenges based solely on race. The court had previously held in Batson v. Kentucky (1986) that prosecutors cannot make peremptory challenges based on race, but didn't address whether defendants could use them. The court had already ruled in Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company (1991) that the Batson prohibition also applies to civil litigants because they are state actors during the jury selection process.

Barry G. Silverman American judge

Barry G. Silverman is a Senior United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Wilkinson v. United States, 365 U.S. 399 (1961), was a court case during the McCarthy Era in which the petitioner, Frank Wilkinson, an administrator with the Los Angeles Public Housing Authority, challenged his conviction under 2 U.S.C. § 192, which makes it a misdemeanor to refuse to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry for any person summoned as a witness by Congress. The petitioner's conviction was sustained in a 5-4 ruling, upholding a prior ruling in Barenblatt v. United States.

Braden v. United States, 365 U.S. 431 (1961), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the conviction of the petitioner, Carl Braden, based on his refusal to answer questions posed to him by the House Un-American Activities Committee, did not violate his First Amendment rights and was constitutional.

Wisconsin Department of Revenue v. William Wrigley Jr. Co., 505 U.S. 214 (1992), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court regarding the application of state franchise taxes to out-of-state businesses.