Case Review and Summary #5
docx
School
Macomb Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
SOCY-1210-
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
1
Uploaded by arprado04
Case Review and Summary #5
Choose one (1) of the cases listed and complete a case brief following the format listed below. There is no length requirement, but the assignment requires you to be thorough and complete.
Kyong Wood and Sheila Copeland v The City of Topeka
Burdeau v Mcdowell
Please include the five elements listed below in your briefing:
1 . Citation-
Give the full citation for the case, including the name of the case, the date it was decided, and the court that decided it.
2 . Facts-
Briefly indicate (a) the reasons for the lawsuit; (b) the identity and arguments of the plaintiff(s) and defendant(s), respectively; and (c) the lower court’s decision—if appropriate.
3 . Issue-
Concisely phrase, in the form of a question, the essential issue before the court. (If more than one issue is involved, you may have two—or even more—questions here.)
4 . Decision-
Indicate here—with a “yes” or “no,” if possible—the court’s answer to the question (or questions) in the Issue
section above.
5 . Reason-
Summarize as briefly as possible the reasons given by the court for its decision (or decisions) and the case or statutory law relied on by the court in arriving at its decision.
Burdeau v. McDowell. In 1921, George Burdeau, a special agent of the Department of Justice, was accused of stealing documents from the office of the American Wholesale Corporation. The stolen documents were given to McDowell, a private detective, who then turned them over to the Department
of Justice. The Department of Justice used the documents as evidence to prosecute the American Wholesale Corporation for antitrust violations. The Corporation sought to suppress the use of the stolen documents as evidence, arguing that their seizure violated the Fourth Amendment. This issue was whether the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures applies to the actions of a private individual who is not acting on behalf of the government? No, the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures does not apply to the actions of a private individual who is not acting on behalf of the government. The Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment only applies to government officials and agents, not to private individuals. In this case, McDowell, a private detective, was not acting on behalf of the government when he received the stolen documents from Burdeau. Therefore, the Fourth Amendment did not apply to his actions.
Discover more documents: Sign up today!
Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help