Jump to content

District of Columbia v. Little/Dissent Burton

From Wikisource
905422District of Columbia v. Little — DissentHarold Hitz Burton
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Opinion of the Court
Dissenting Opinion
Burton

United States Supreme Court

339 U.S. 1

District of Columbia  v.  Little

 Argued: Jan. 11-12, 1950. --- Decided: Feb 20, 1950


Mr. Justice BURTON, with whom Mr. Justice REED concurs, dissenting.

If this Court is to interpret an ordinance of the District of Columbia, it seems to me that the action of the respondent was an effective interference with an inspector of the District Health Department in the performance of his official duties, and that such conduct of the respondent violated the ordinance that is before us. In my opinion, also, the duties which the inspector was seeking to perform, under the authority of the District, were of such a reasonable, general, routine, accepted and important character, in the protection of the public health and safety, that they were being performed lawfully without such a search warrant as is required by the Fourth Amendment to protect the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Accordingly, the conviction of the respondent should be sustained, and the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals affirming the judgment of the Municipal Court of Appeals setting aside that conviction should be reversed.

Notes

[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse