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

Facts

  • A federal narcotics agent, John Marsh, worked with a paid informant, James Hereford, whose prior information Marsh had consistently found accurate and reliable.
  • Hereford reported that James Draper was dealing narcotics in Denver and had gone to Chicago to obtain heroin.
  • Hereford predicted Draper would return to Denver by train on one of two specified mornings and provided detailed identifying information, including clothing, luggage (a tan zipper bag), and a habit of walking “real fast.”
  • Marsh went to Denver’s Union Station on the specified mornings and observed a man arriving from Chicago within the predicted timeframe who matched the described clothing, carried the tan zipper bag, and walked quickly.
  • Marsh and a local police officer arrested Draper without a warrant and searched him and his bag.
  • Officers found two envelopes of heroin on Draper’s person and a hypodermic syringe in his bag.
  • Draper was charged under 21 U.S.C. § 174; the trial court denied his motion to suppress the seized items, and Draper was convicted.
  • The Tenth Circuit affirmed; the Supreme Court granted review.

Issues

  1. Whether an agent had probable cause (and “reasonable grounds” under 26 U.S.C. § 7607) to arrest Draper without a warrant based on a reliable informant’s detailed tip corroborated by the agent’s observations.
  2. Whether hearsay information from an informant may be considered in determining probable cause for a warrantless arrest and the resulting search and seizure.

Decision

  • The Supreme Court affirmed Draper’s conviction.
  • The Court held the warrantless arrest was supported by probable cause and “reasonable grounds” under § 7607.
  • The Court held that informant information, even if hearsay, may be used in the probable-cause assessment.
  • Because the arrest was lawful, the contemporaneous search of Draper and seizure of heroin and the syringe were valid as incident to arrest, and the evidence was properly admitted.
  • Justice Douglas dissented, warning that arrests based largely on informant accusations risk weakening Fourth Amendment protections.
  • Probable cause is a practical, common-sense judgment based on probabilities, not the trial standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • Hearsay may be considered in determining probable cause, including information supplied by an informant.
  • A detailed, predictive tip from an informant with demonstrated reliability can establish probable cause when police corroborate significant aspects of the prediction through observation.
  • “Reasonable grounds” for narcotics-agent warrantless arrests under 26 U.S.C. § 7607 is treated as substantially equivalent to Fourth Amendment probable cause.
  • A search and seizure conducted contemporaneously with a lawful custodial arrest is valid as a search incident to arrest.

Conclusion

The Court held that corroboration of a reliable informant’s detailed, predictive description supplied probable cause for Draper’s warrantless arrest, and the subsequent search and seizure were valid incident to that lawful arrest.