Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Massachusetts v. Sheppard

United States Supreme Court
468 U.S. 981 (1984)


Facts

Osborne Sheppard (defendant) was a suspect in the murder of Sandra Boulware. Detective Peter O’Malley drafted an affidavit to support an arrest warrant for Sheppard and a search warrant for Sheppard’s home. The district attorney agreed that the affidavit set forth probable cause supporting the warrants. O’Malley could not locate a warrant application form, because it was Sunday and the court was closed. O’Malley found a previously used warrant application form. The form was for a different suspect in a different district and authorized a search for controlled substances, which was a more limited scope than called for in O’Malley’s affidavit. O’Malley used a typewriter to make various changes to the form and then presented the form and affidavit to a judge. The judge told O’Malley that he would make the changes necessary to validate the warrant and then sign the warrant. The judge then made certain changes to the form in O’Malley’s presence and signed the form. A reference to “controlled substances” was not removed from the portion of the form that would constitute the actual warrant when signed. O’Malley searched Sheppard’s residence pursuant to the signed warrant and found incriminating evidence. Sheppard was convicted. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts reversed the conviction, finding that the evidence obtained in the search should have been excluded because the search was broader than the warrant authorized. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (White, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 217,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.