An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U.S. 717 (1961), full title Marcus v. Search Warrant of Property at 104 East Tenth Street, Kansas City, Missouri, is an in rem case decided by the United States Supreme Court on the seizure of obscene materials. The Court unanimously overturned a Missouri Supreme Court decision upholding the forfeiture of hundreds of magazines confiscated from a Kansas City wholesaler. It held that both Missouri's procedures for the seizure of allegedly obscene material and the execution of the warrant itself violated the Fourth and Fourteenth amendments' prohibitions on search and seizure without due process. Those violations, in turn, threatened the rights protected by the First Amendment.

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U.S. 717 (1961), full title Marcus v. Search Warrant of Property at 104 East Tenth Street, Kansas City, Missouri, is an in rem case decided by the United States Supreme Court on the seizure of obscene materials. The Court unanimously overturned a Missouri Supreme Court decision upholding the forfeiture of hundreds of magazines confiscated from a Kansas City wholesaler. It held that both Missouri's procedures for the seizure of allegedly obscene material and the execution of the warrant itself violated the Fourth and Fourteenth amendments' prohibitions on search and seizure without due process. Those violations, in turn, threatened the rights protected by the First Amendment. The case had begun in 1957, when the Kansas City Police Department vice squad raided the warehouse of a local news distributor and five newsstands. Officers seized dozens of publications, far beyond those which had started the investigation, since the search warrants were not specific. Less than half of the seized titles were ultimately found obscene and ordered to be burnt. Justice William Brennan wrote for the Court. He found the officers' conduct similar to that which had inspired the Founding Fathers to write the Fourth Amendment. He added that the Missouri Supreme Court had incorrectly applied an earlier Court holding in sustaining the forfeiture. The result was a system that operated as an effective prior restraint. Hugo Black, in a concurring opinion, joined by William O. Douglas restated his conviction that the Fourteenth Amendment applies all the rights protected by the Constitution to the states. Marcus broke ground in holding that First Amendment interests required an additional layer of procedure than other instances of seizure. It would figure prominently in later obscenity cases involving seizures, including one called Quantity of Books v. Kansas, that explicitly tried to take its holding into account. After the Court settled on a definition of obscenity in the early 1970s, it continued to hear other cases on the issues first addressed in Marcus. (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 31347075 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 28303 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1101863733 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:arguedate
  • 0001-03-30 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear
  • 1961 (xsd:integer)
dbp:case
  • Marcus v. Search Warrant, (en)
dbp:concurrence
  • Black (en)
dbp:decidedate
  • 0001-06-19 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear
  • 1961 (xsd:integer)
dbp:docket
  • 60 (xsd:integer)
dbp:findlaw
dbp:fullname
  • Marcus v. Search Warrant of Property at 104 East Tenth Street, Kansas City, Missouri (en)
dbp:googlescholar
dbp:holding
  • Where material to be seized may be protected by First Amendment, search warrant must be as specific as possible as to items to be seized; seizure itself must be limited only to items enumerated in warrant. Missouri Supreme Court reversed and remanded. (en)
dbp:joinconcurrence
  • Douglas (en)
dbp:justia
dbp:lawsapplied
  • U.S. Const. Amds. I, IV and XIV (en)
dbp:litigants
  • Marcus v. Search Warrant (en)
dbp:loc
dbp:majority
  • Brennan (en)
dbp:opinionannouncement
dbp:oralargument
dbp:oyez
dbp:parallelcitations
  • 172800.0
dbp:prior
  • 172800.0
dbp:uspage
  • 717 (xsd:integer)
dbp:usvol
  • 367 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dcterms:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Marcus v. Search Warrant, 367 U.S. 717 (1961), full title Marcus v. Search Warrant of Property at 104 East Tenth Street, Kansas City, Missouri, is an in rem case decided by the United States Supreme Court on the seizure of obscene materials. The Court unanimously overturned a Missouri Supreme Court decision upholding the forfeiture of hundreds of magazines confiscated from a Kansas City wholesaler. It held that both Missouri's procedures for the seizure of allegedly obscene material and the execution of the warrant itself violated the Fourth and Fourteenth amendments' prohibitions on search and seizure without due process. Those violations, in turn, threatened the rights protected by the First Amendment. (en)
rdfs:label
  • Marcus v. Search Warrant (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
foaf:name
  • (en)
  • Marcus v. Search Warrant of Property at 104 East Tenth Street, Kansas City, Missouri (en)
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License