Walder v. United States

Background

In May 1950 a man was indicted for purchasing and possessing one grain of heroin. He moved to suppress the heroin as the product of an unlawful search and seizure; the judge granted the motion and the case was dismissed. In January 1952 he was indicted on four other narcotics charges. The Government’s proof depended largely on two drug-addict witnesses; the defendant was the only defense witness. On direct examination he repeatedly and broadly denied ever selling, possessing, or handling narcotics.

Reasoning

The narrow question was whether that blanket denial opened the door to using the heroin seized in 1950 — obtained unlawfully — for the limited purpose of impeaching his credibility. The Court said the Fourth Amendment still bars the Government from using illegally obtained evidence in its main case, but it does not let a defendant testify falsely and then hide behind the illegality to prevent contradiction. Because the defendant went beyond denying the charged offenses and asserted he never possessed narcotics, the Court allowed the Government to present the earlier seized heroin to impeach his testimony. The Court compared this situation to Agnello and relied on Weeks and related decisions in explaining the limits on using tainted evidence.

Real world impact

The ruling means criminal defendants who give broad denials can be challenged with evidence that was unlawfully seized, but the Government still cannot use such evidence as part of its principal case against a defendant. Two Justices dissented, expressing disagreement with the Court’s approach.