Agnello v. United States

Background

Five men were charged with conspiring to sell cocaine without registering or paying a special tax. Government agents and a city policeman helped an undercover purchase at one defendant’s house, arrested the group there, and later searched another defendant’s nearby home and a separate residence where they found a can of cocaine. That can was initially excluded because the search had no warrant, but the prosecutor later offered it in rebuttal during trial. One defendant, Frank Agnello, denied knowing about the can; others testified that some packages were provided by government agents to create an apparent sale.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the warrantless search of Agnello’s home violated the Fourth Amendment and whether admitting that seized evidence violated the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. The Court explained that private homes generally require a warrant to be searched except when the search is a lawful incident to an arrest made at that house. Because Agnello’s house was searched several blocks from the place of arrest and after the arrests had ended, the search was unlawful. Evidence obtained by such a search could not be used to incriminate him. The Court found the prosecutor’s later use of that seizure in rebuttal was improper and prejudicial as to Agnello, so his conviction must be reversed. The Court affirmed the convictions of the other defendants because the improperly seized evidence was admitted only against Agnello and did not prejudice their cases.

Real world impact

Agnello gets a new trial; the other convictions stand. The decision reinforces that warrantless searches of private homes are generally unlawful and bars use of evidence obtained that way against the homeowner.