Weeks V. United States

Introduction

Weeks v. United States marked the creation of the exclusionary rule, which originally stated that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure could not be used against a person in federal court.In Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914), the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment. It also set forth the exclusionary rule that prohibits admission of illegally obtained evidence in federal courts.

Discussion

Fremont Weeks was suspected of using the mail system to distribute chances in a lottery, which was considered gambling and was illegal in Missouri (Ironically, gambling is now legal in Missouri). State agents entered his home, searched his room, and took possession of papers and other property belonging to the Plaintiff. Later that day, the State agents returned to the house with a U.S. Marshal in order to collect more evidence and took letters and envelopes from Weeks' chiffonier drawers. In both instances, the police did not have a search warrant.

The rules and procedure governing use of evidence in the American judicial system arises largely from the English common law, and until 1914, the United States Supreme Court remained faithful to the precepts it dictated - that is, that the process by which evidence was obtained had very little to do with the permissibility of its use in court. Common law stated that the evidence may be used, and that there could be legal prosecution and punishment of those guilty of breaking the law in order to obtain the evidence (Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, pp 44-383)

In several earlier cases, the U.S. Supreme Court abided by these common law rules, and allowed both state and federal courts to employ evidence obtained by an illegal search and seizure. However, in the late 19th and early 20th century, this attitude began to shift, as arguments were made that if the Court did not recognize that the Fourth Amendment provides protection against unlawful searches, the amendment itself would be meaningless. Fremont Weeks was arrested in Kansas City, Missouri by a law enforcement officer. During the apprehension, the arresting officer performed a search of Weeks' home, although he did not have a search warrant. The search turned up evidence of violation of federal law, whereby U.S. mail was used to send lottery tickets. Encouraged by the results of the search of Weeks' home, a United States marshal, together with a local police officer and a federal postal inspector, searched Weeks' residence for the second time (again without a warrant), and seized some letters and documents. Weeks filed a complaint in order to retrieve the papers, and petitioned to have the illegally seized evidence excluded from the trial (Hall, pp 45-373).

Before the decision in Weeks v. United States, the courts admitted illegally seized material as evidence to avoid allowing guilty parties to go free. The rights of the individual were considered less important ...