Wolf v. Colorado

Background

A person convicted in a Colorado state court had been tried using evidence the police obtained by a search the Supreme Court had earlier called “unreasonable.” Colorado courts had admitted that evidence and sustained convictions, so the cases were brought to this Court to decide whether using such evidence in a state trial violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of due process.

Reasoning

The Court asked whether the state’s use of evidence that federal courts would exclude under the Weeks rule denied due process. The majority said the core protection of privacy against arbitrary police intrusion (the heart of the Fourth Amendment) is “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” and therefore applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. But the Court also held that the specific federal judicial rule that excludes illegally obtained evidence is not a required remedy for states. The Court relied on prior decisions, the varied practices of the States, and alternative remedies like police discipline and civil suits, and it affirmed the Colorado convictions.

Real world impact

The ruling means state courts may, under state law, admit evidence obtained by unreasonable searches even though the Fourth Amendment applies to states. People arrested or searched by state or local police, state prosecutors, and state courts will feel the practical effect, because exclusion of evidence is not automatically required in every state. The Court noted that Congress or later legislation could raise different questions.

Dissents or concurrances

A Justice concurred in the result while stressing the Fourth Amendment applies to states. Several Justices dissented, arguing exclusion of illegally obtained evidence is the only effective sanction and that the convictions should be reversed.