NCJ Number
40500
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology Volume: 67 Issue: 4 Dated: (DECEMBER 1976) Pages: 373-388
Date Published
1977
Length
16 pages
Annotation
THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES THE PROVISIONS, OPINIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS OF THREE 1976 U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS: FISHER V. UNITED STATES, UNITED STATES V. KASMIR, AND UNITED STATES V. MILLER.
Abstract
DURING ITS 1976 SESSION THE SUPREME COURT RULED ON THREE CASES INVOLVING CHALLENGES TO COURT ORDERED SUMMONSES FOR THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS. IN TWO OF THE CASES THE PETITIONERS ARGUED THAT THE COMPULSION TO PRODUCE THE SUMMONED DOCUMENTS WOULD VIOLATE THEIR FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE AGAINST COMPELLED SELF-INCRIMINATION. IN THE THIRD CASE THE COURT ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THE RESPONDENT HAD A SUFFICIENT FOURTH AMENDMENT INTEREST IN THE SUMMONED DOCUMENTS TO CHALLENGE THE VALIDITY OF A SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM. WHILE THE TWO FORMER CASES RAISE A DIFFERENT CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION FROM THE LATTER, ALL THREE CASES SERVE TO DEFINITIVELY OUTLINE THE LIMITS OF FUTURE CHALLENGES TO THE COMPELLED PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS. IN FISHER V. UNITED STATES AND ITS COMPANION CASE, UNITED STATES V. KASMIR THE COURT RULED THAT A SUMMONS DIRECTING AN ATTORNEY TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS DELIVERED TO THE ATTORNEY BY HIS CLIENT IS ENFORCEABLE OVER CLAIMS THAT COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUMMONS WOULD CREATE A VIOLATION OF BOTH THE CLIENT'S FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE AGAINST COMPELLED SELF-INCRIMINATION AND HIS RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE IN CONFIDENCE WITH HIS ATTORNEY. IN UNITED STATES V. MILLER THE SUPREME COURT AGAIN REVIEWED PRIVACY INTERESTS ARISING UNDER A CHALLENGE TO A SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM. BUT IN MILLER THE COURT DISCUSSED PRIVACY INTERESTS ARISING UNDER A FOURTH AMENDMENT CHALLENGE TO THE COURT SUMMONS. IN MILLER THE COURT RULED THAT A DEFENDANT IN A CRIMINAL HEARING HAD NO PROTECTABLE FOURTH AMENDMENT INTEREST TO SUPPRESS BANK RECORDS MAINTAINED PURSUANT TO THE BANK SECRECY ACT OF 1970. DETAILED ANALYSES OF THE JUSTICES' OPINIONS AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF THESE DECISIONS ARE PROVIDED FOR EACH CASE. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)...DMC