United States v. Draper, 358 U.S. 307 (1959)

Facts

Marsh was a narcotics agent who used the assistance of Hereford for tips.  Hereford had been reliable in the past.  Hereford told Marsh that Draper was selling drugs and would be arriving in Denver on one of two days with heroin.  Hereford described Draper, down to what he would be wearing.  Marsh saw Draper at the train station, stopped him, and in his search, discovered two envelopes containing heroin.

Procedural History

The District Court found that Marsh had probable cause to stop Draper without a warrant and denied the motion to suppress.  The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Issue(s)

Did the lower courts err in finding that the description of Draper was sufficient to provide probable cause for the stop of Draper?

Holding(s)

No.

Reasoning/Analysis

Draper argued (1) that the evidence was hearsay and could not have been considered and (2) Marsh’s information should be held insufficient to show probable cause.  The Court disagreed with Draper’s contentions and found that with every bit of Hereford’s information being verified, Marsh had reasonable grounds to believe that Draper would have heroin.  We deal with probabilities, factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men act.

Judgment/Outcome

The Court affirmed the judgment of the lower courts.

Concurring Opinions/Dissenting Opinions/Comments

Douglas dissented stating that if an arrest is made without a warrant, the offense must be committed in the presence of the officer or the officer must have reasonable grounds.  The arresting officer did not have a bit of evidence.