Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Andresen v. Maryland

427 U.S. 463 (1976)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...

Andresen v. Maryland

United States Supreme Court

427 U.S. 463 (1976)

Play video

Facts

In 1972, a real-estate attorney named Peter Andresen (defendant) came under investigation for fraud. The investigation revealed that Andresen had defrauded the purchaser of Lot 13T by claiming the property was free of encumbrances and did not require title insurance even though Andresen knew that there were two existing liens. The purchaser had to stop construction when the lienholders threatened foreclosure. Andresen then defrauded the title-insurance company he worked for and issued an insurance policy to the purchaser warranting clear title on the land. The investigators were able to show probable cause, and a judge with the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Montgomery County issued warrants to search Andresen’s law and corporate offices for documents concerning the sale of Lot 13T. On October 31, 1972, the offices were searched, and numerous files were seized. Andresen was criminally charged with false pretenses and fraudulent misappropriation by a fiduciary. At trial, Andresen moved to suppress the seized documents. He argued that the phrase “together with other fruits, instrumentalities and evidence of crime at this (time) unknown” at the end of the document lists in the warrants rendered them “general” warrants, which are prohibited by the Fourth Amendment, and that admitting the documents into evidence forced him to be a witness against himself in violation of the Fifth Amendment. The motion was denied. Andresen was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to eight two-year prison terms, running concurrently. The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland rejected Andresen's Fourth and Fifth Amendment claims. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)

Dissent (Brennan, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 606,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 606,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 606,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,800 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership