|
|
Salsburg v. Maryland, 346 U.S. 545 (1954)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Salsburg v. Maryland, 346 U.S. 545 (1954)
Salsburg v. Maryland No. 38 Argued October 20, 1953 Decided January 11, 1954 346 U.S. 545
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND
Syllabus
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not violated by the Maryland statute here involved, which makes evidence obtained by illegal search or seizure generally inadmissible in prosecutions in state courts for misdemeanors, but permits the admission of such evidence in prosecutions in Anne Arundel County for certain gambling misdemeanors. Pp. 546-554.
(a) The statute is within the liberal legislative license allowed a state in prescribing rules of practice relating to its police power. Pp. 549-550.
(b) The statute is not rendered invalid by the fact that illegally obtained evidence is not admissible in prosecutions for lottery misdemeanors, though admissible in prosecutions for operating gambling pools, nor by the fact that such evidence is not admissible in prosecutions for violations of county gambling restrictions, though admissible in prosecutions for violations of comparable state gambling restrictions. P. 550.
(c) Distinctions based on county areas are not necessarily so unreasonable as to violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 550-554.
(d) The statute does not affirmatively sanction illegal searches and seizures in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. P. 554.
201 Md. 212, 94 A.2d 280, affirmed.
Appellant’s conviction of a gambling misdemeanor was affirmed by the Maryland Court of Appeals over his objection that evidence had been admitted under a Maryland statute which violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 201 Md. 212, 94 A.2d 280. On appeal to this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1257(2), affirmed, p. 554.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Salsburg v. Maryland, 346 U.S. 545 (1954) in 346 U.S. 545 346 U.S. 546. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=VU9JB4ZQV19M6E9.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Salsburg v. Maryland, 346 U.S. 545 (1954), in 346 U.S. 545, page 346 U.S. 546. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=VU9JB4ZQV19M6E9.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Salsburg v. Maryland, 346 U.S. 545 (1954). cited in 1954, 346 U.S. 545, pp.346 U.S. 546. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=VU9JB4ZQV19M6E9.
|