## Facts

- A San Francisco housing inspector sought to conduct a routine annual inspection of an apartment building for Housing Code compliance.
- The inspector was informed that Roland Camara, the ground-floor lessee, was allegedly using part of his premises as a residence contrary to the occupancy permit.
- The inspector requested entry into Camara’s quarters without a warrant; Camara refused consent absent a warrant.
- Inspectors made additional attempts to inspect without a warrant; Camara again refused.
- Camara was charged criminally under the Housing Code for refusing, after multiple efforts, to allow a warrantless inspection of the residence he leased.
- Camara sought a writ of prohibition in state court to stop the prosecution, arguing the ordinance unconstitutionally authorized warrantless inspections; state courts denied relief based on then-controlling precedent.

## Issues

1. Whether the Fourth Amendment permits criminal prosecution of a person who refuses to allow a warrantless administrative inspection of a private residence for housing-code compliance.
2. Whether routine municipal housing-code inspections of private residences constitute “searches” subject to the Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness and warrant requirements.
3. What standard of probable cause applies to warrants for area-wide administrative inspection programs.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
- The Court held that the Fourth Amendment bars prosecution for refusing to permit a warrantless code-enforcement inspection of a personal residence.
- The Court overruled prior precedent to the extent it approved warrantless administrative inspections of residences enforced through criminal sanctions.
- The Court held that administrative inspection warrants may issue on a form of probable cause based on the reasonableness of the area-inspection program, not individualized suspicion of a specific violation.

## Legal Principles

- Routine housing-code inspections of private residences are “searches” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.
- Absent consent or a carefully defined exception, warrantless entry into private residential property for inspection is unreasonable.
- The warrant requirement serves to limit official discretion by interposing a neutral magistrate between the inspector and the occupant.
- For administrative inspection warrants, probable cause may be shown by reasonable legislative or administrative standards for conducting an area inspection (e.g., passage of time, nature of the building, or condition of the area), rather than evidence that the particular dwelling contains a violation.
- A city may not use criminal process to compel a resident to submit to an inspection that the Fourth Amendment would require to be authorized by a warrant.

## Conclusion

The Court held that the Fourth Amendment generally requires a warrant for routine housing-code inspections of residences and that a resident cannot be criminally punished for refusing warrantless entry; administrative warrants may be supported by program-based, area-level probable cause standards.


Camara v. Mun. Ct. of S.F., 387 U.S. 523 (1967)