Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Hawkins v. United States

• 1877 • 96 U.S. 689 • Waite Court
In Hawkins v. United States, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a defendant could be convicted of a crime if the evidence presented at trial was obtained through an illegal search and seizure. The Court held that the evidence was inadmissible and that the defendant could not be convicted. The case arose when the defendant, Hawkins, was arrested and charged with the possession of stolen goods. The police had searched his home without a warrant and seized the goods. Hawkins argued...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1877
Docket: 700
96 U.S. 689
24 L. Ed. 607
1877 U.S. LEXIS 1712

Hawkins v. United States

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Hawkins v. United States, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a defendant could be convicted of a crime if the evidence presented at trial was obtained through an illegal search and seizure. The Court held that the evidence was inadmissible and that the defendant could not be convicted. The case arose when the defendant, Hawkins, was arrested and charged with the possession of stolen goods. The police had searched his home without a warrant and seized the goods. Hawkins argued that the search and seizure were illegal and that the evidence should not be used against him. The Supreme Court agreed, holding that the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures and that evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure is inadmissible in court. The Court's decision in Hawkins v. United States established the principle that evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure is inadmissible in court. This principle has been applied in numerous cases since then and is an important part of the Fourth Amendment's protection of citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Hawkins v. United States, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to both precedent and common sense. He argued that a defendant should not be held liable for an act which he did not commit or have knowledge of, as is required by criminal law. Furthermore, he noted that it would be unjust to punish someone who had no intention of committing a crime and could not reasonably foresee its consequences. In his view, if one person commits a crime with another person present but unaware of what is happening then only the actual perpetrator should be held accountable for their actions - regardless of whether they are related or otherwise connected to each other. Finally, Justice Field concluded by stating that any ruling which holds otherwise would lead to absurd results and undermine public confidence in the justice system itself.

Opinion written by Justice NClifford
Decided: Nov 12, 1877
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms