Michigan v. Tyler
| Michigan v. Tyler | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 10, 1978 Decided May 31, 1978 | |
| Full case name | Michigan v. Tyler |
| Citations | 436 U.S. 499 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Holding | |
| Although firefighters and police can seize evidence of arson in plain view shortly after a fire, evidence of arson can not be seized by firefighters days after a fire without consent, a search warrant, or proof of abandonment. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Stewart, joined by Burger, Powell, White, Marshall (except IV-A), Blackmun (I, III, and IV-A) |
| Concurrence | Stevens (I, III, and IV; in judgement) |
| Dissent | Rehnquist |
| Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution | |
Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that firefighters can not enter a burned premises (in this case, a furniture store) to retrieve evidence of arson barring a search warrant, evidence of exigent circumstances, evidence of abandonment, or consent.[1]
Dissent
Justice William Rehnquist argued that due to Tyler's actions, and business being unlikely to resume until major repairs are completed, the subsequent searches were reasonable under the circumstances.[2]
References
- ^ The Quantum of Suspicion Needed for an Exigent Circumstances Search University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform. Volume 52. Kit Kinports. 2019
- ^ Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499 (1978) Justia
External links
Text of Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499 (1978) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)