United States v. Ceccolini
435 U.S. 268 · Decided March 21, 1978 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
United States v. Ceccolini was decided on March 21, 1978 by a vote of 6–2. The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Search and seizure (general)” in the Criminal Procedure area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 435 U.S. 268 · 98 S. Ct. 1054 · 55 L. Ed. 2d 268 · 1978 U.S. LEXIS 70
- Docket number
- 76-1151
- Decided
- March 21, 1978
- Argued
- December 5, 1977
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–2
- Majority opinion
- William H. Rehnquist
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Search and seizure (general)
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Legal provision
- Exclusionary rule (Fourth Amendment)
- Type of law
- Other
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority |
Did not participate: Harry A. Blackmun.
Full case caption
United States v. Ceccolini
SCDB identifiers: case 1977-052, docket 1977-052-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Search and seizure (general)”
- Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Michigan v. Tyler
- Zurcher v. Stanford Daily
- Mincey v. Arizona
- Franks v. Delaware
- United States v. New York Telephone Co.
Cases on the same legal provision: Exclusionary rule (Fourth Amendment)
- United States v. Crews
- United States v. Havens
- Brown v. Illinois
- Linkletter v. Walker
- Angelet v. Fay
- California v. Hurst.
Same Term, same area (Criminal Procedure)
- Rinaldi v. United States
- Pennsylvania v. Mimms
- United States v. New York Telephone Co.
- Moore v. Illinois
- Smith v. Digmon
- Bordenkircher v. Hayes
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error