Lewis v. United States
S. Ct. (1996)
Author:- Nolo

Facts:- An undercover officer set up a meeting with the petitioner for the purposes of buying marihuana. The petitioner invited the undercover officer to his home and the meeting took place and the petitioner sold the officer five bags of marihuana. The petitioner also told the officer that in future dealings, he will give the officer a special deal and give him a bag of marihuana for free. Another meeting took place at petitioner's house and the petitioner did sell to the officer 5 bags of marihuana with 1 extra bag for free. This evidence was used to convict the petitioner for violation of narcotics laws. Now the petitioner argues that his 4th Amendment rights were violated when the undercover officer deceived him and entered his house.

Issue:- Are the 4th Amendment rights violated when a government agent misrepresents his identity and enters the house of a person with the purpose of buying narcotics?

Holding:- No

Reasoning:- Prohibiting the police from conducting such undercover tactics will severely limit their crime controlling effectiveness. "Were we to hold that deceptions of the agent in this case constitutionally prohibited, we would come near to a rule that the use of undercover agents in any manner is virtually unconstitutional per se." Furthermore, the petitioner used his house to conduct commercial illegal transactions and the undercover officer entered the house with the sole purposes of buying marihuana. So the petitioner's house can not be given the regular 4th Amendment protection because the petitioner used his house for illegal commercial transactions. The conviction was affirmed.

Some thoughts:- Humm, I am a webmaster and I run my ebusiness from my home. Does this mean that my house is not protected under the "traditional" home protections of the 4th Amendment?

BACK