Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

New York Vs. Burger

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 19, 1987

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

62 entries 3 linked 59 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Biswell US Supreme Court · May 15, 1972
    Relied / Followed
  2. Donovan Vs. Dewey US Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1981
  3. O'Connor Vs. Ortega US Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1987
  4. U.S. 691 (1987) U.S. Supreme Court New York v. Burger
    Search
  5. U.S. 691 (1987) New York v. Burger
    Search
  6. allowing government officials to ensure that such rules are followed -- and through penal sanctions. Cf. United States v. Biswell
    Search
  7. When respondent moved for reconsideration in light of a recent decision of the Appellate Division, People v. Pace
    Search
  8. on unreasonable searches and seizures is applicable to commercial premises, as well as to private homes. See v. City
    Search
  9. has an expectation of privacy in commercial property, which society is prepared to consider to be reasonable, see Katz v. United
    Search
  10. evidence but also with respect to administrative inspections designed to enforce regulatory statutes. See Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  11. premises, however, is different from, and indeed less than, a similar expectation in an individual's home. See Donovan v. Dewey
    Search
  12. industries. The Court observed in Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  13. Certain industries have such a history of government oversight that no reasonable expectation of privacy, see Katz v. United
    Search
  14. Ibid. In Colonnade Corp. v. United
    Search
  15. Id. at 397 U. S. 77 . We returned to this issue in United States v. Biswell
    Search
  16. industry, has received renewed emphasis in more recent decisions. In Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  17. industry. Donovan v. Dewey
    Search
  18. supra. Indeed, in Donovan v. Dewey
    Search
  19. which fulfill the traditional Fourth Amendment standard of reasonableness for a government search, see O'Connor v. Ortega
    Search
  20. New Jersey v. T.L
    Search
  21. government interest that informs the regulatory scheme pursuant to which the inspection is made. See Donovan v. Dewey
    Search
  22. Colonnade Corp. v. United
    Search
  23. to the law and has a properly defined scope, and it must limit the discretion of the inspecting officers. See Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  24. People v. Tinneny
    Search
  25. In this respect, we see no difference between these inspections and those approved by the Court in United States v. Biswell
    Search
  26. and Donovan v. Dewey
    Search
  27. U.S. at 406 U. S. 316 . See also Donovan v. Dewey
    Search
  28. do not constitute discretionary acts by a government official, but are conducted pursuant to statute. See Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  29. of the inspection is limited, United States v. Biswell
    Search
  30. at 406 U. S. 315 , to place appropriate restraints upon the discretion of the inspecting officers. See Donovan v. Dewey
    Search
  31. laws, a major emphasis of which is the punishment of individuals for specific acts of behavior. In United States v. Biswell
    Search
  32. it, an inspecting officer may discover evidence of crimes, besides violations of the scheme itself. In United States v. Biswell
    Search
  33. administrative inspection does not render that search illegal, or the administrative scheme suspect. Cf. United States v. Villamonte-Marguez
    Search
  34. the States the burden of requiring the enforcement of their regulatory statutes to be carried out by specialized agents. v. Accordingly
    Search
  35. In People v. Pace
    Search
  36. of the constitutionality of the statute and charter was squarely presented by this case, as it had not been in People v. Pace
    Search
  37. Courts have upheld such statutes against federal constitutional attack. See, e.g., Bionic Auto Parts & Sales, Inc. v. Fahner
    Search
  38. People v. Easley
    Search
  39. Moore v. State
    Search
  40. People v. Barnes
    Search
  41. State v. Zinmeister
    Search
  42. State v. Tindell
    Search
  43. Shirley v. Commonwealth
    Search
  44. Va. 49, 57-58, 235 S.E.2d 432, 436-437 (1977). But see People v. Krull
    Search
  45. State v. Galio
    Search
  46. U.S. Supreme Court New York v. Burger
    Search
  47. Cf. United States v. Biswell
    Search
  48. of the Appellate Division, People v. Pace
    Search
  49. See v. City
    Search
  50. Katz v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial