support@bluetogold.com

or use our live chat

888-579-7796

Customer Service

LEGAL

RESEARCH

Gerstein v. Pugh

Facts

The defendants were arrested and charged with felonies based on a prosecutorโ€™s charging document. At that time, the state only required indictments for capital offenses. State case law held that the filing of an information foreclosed the defendantโ€™s right to have a judge determine whether probable cause existed for the arrest.

Issue

Whether a person arrested and held for trial under an information is constitutionally entitled to a judicial determination of probable cause for pretrial restraint of liberty?

Held

Yes. The Fourth Amendment demands a judicial review of an arrest before an โ€œextended restraint of libertyโ€ is imposed.

Discussion

The Court noted that in many instances, the government is permitted to act without the review of a judicial authority. The Court stated that โ€œa policemanโ€™s on-the-scene assessment of probable cause provides legal justification for arresting a person suspected of crime, and for a brief period of detention to take the administrative steps incident to arrest. Once the suspect is in custody, however, the reasons that justify dispensing with the magistrateโ€™s neutral judgment evaporate.โ€ At some point, the governmentโ€™s need to secure the defendant subsides and โ€œthe suspectโ€™s need for a neutral determination of probable cause increases significantly.โ€ Based on these factors the Court held that โ€œthe Fourth Amendment requires a judicial determination of probable cause as a prerequisite to extended restraint of liberty following arrest.โ€ The fact that the prosecutor found substantial evidence to warrant a prosecution does not afford the citizen the protections contemplated in the Fourth Amendment.

Citation

420 U.S. 103, 95 S. Ct. 854 (1975)

Send a message!

Subscribe to Update