Jump to content

United States v. Mara

From Wikisource
United States v. Mara (1973)
Syllabus
4724848United States v. Mara — Syllabus1973
Court Documents
Dissenting Opinions
Douglas
Marshall
Separate Opinion
Brennan

Supreme Court of the United States

410 U.S. 19

United States  v.  Mara, AKA Marasovich

Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

No. 71-850.  Argued: November 6, 1972 --- Decided: January 22, 1973

Respondent, subpoenaed to furnish handwriting exemplars to enable a grand jury to determine whether he was the author of certain writings, was held in contempt after refusing compliance, the District Court having rejected respondent's contention that such compelled production would constitute an unreasonable search and seizure. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the Fourth Amendment applied and that the Government had to make a preliminary showing of reasonableness.

Held: The specific and narrowly drawn directive to furnish a handwriting specimen, which, like the compelled speech disclosure upheld in United States v. Dionisio, ante, p. 1, involved production of physical characteristics, violated no legitimate Fourth Amendment interest. Pp. 21-22.


454 F.2d 580, reversed and remanded.


STEWART, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and WHITE, BLACKMUN, POWELL, and REHNQUIST, JJ., joined. DOUGLAS, J., post, p. 23, BRENNAN, J., post, p. 22, and MARSHALL, J., post, p. 31, filed dissenting opinions.


Philip A. Lacovara argued the cause for the United States. On the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Petersen, Wm. Bradford Reynolds, Beatrice Rosenberg, and Sidney M. Glazer.

Angelo Ruggiero argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.

Phylis Skloot Bamberger argued the cause for the Federal Community Defender Organization of the Legal Aid Society of New York as amicus curiae urging affirmance. With her on the brief was William E. Hellerstein.