United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez

494 U.S. 259 (1990)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Rene Martin Verdugo-Urquidez (D) is a citizen and resident of Mexico. DEA believed him to be one of the leaders of a large and violent organization in Mexico that smuggles narcotics into the United States. P obtained a warrant for his arrest on August 3, 1985. Mexican police officers arrested P in Mexico and transported him to the United States Border Patrol station in Calexico, California. D is now incarcerated pending trial. P searched D's Mexican residences. They did this in concert with Mexican authorities. They uncovered a tally sheet, which the Government believes reflects the quantities of marijuana smuggled by D into the United States. The District Court granted D's motion to suppress evidence seized during the searches, concluding that the Fourth Amendment applied to the searches and that the DEA agents had failed to justify searching respondent's premises without a warrant. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. In Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), American citizens tried by United States military authorities in a foreign country were entitled to the protections of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, and concluded that '[t]he Constitution imposes substantive constraints on the federal government, even when it operates abroad.' In INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984), where illegal aliens in the United States have Fourth Amendment rights, the Ninth Circuit majority found it 'difficult to conclude that D lacks these same protections.' D is entitled to due process under the fifth amendment, and a fair trial under the sixth amendment, and to deny him the protection from unreasonable searches and seizures afforded under the fourth amendment would be rather odd. The dissenting judge argued that this Court's statement in United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304, 318 (1936), that '[n]either the Constitution nor the laws passed in pursuance of it have any force in foreign territory unless in respect of our own citizens,' foreclosed any claim by respondent to Fourth Amendment rights. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.