Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478 (1991), was a United States Supreme Court case. A prosecutor was absolutely immune from damages based upon positions taken in a probable cause hearing for a search warrant. The same prosecutor was not held entitled to immunity for giving legal advice to the police about the legality of an investigative practice.[1]
| Burns v. Reed | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued November 28, 1990 Decided May 30, 1991 | |
| Full case name | Cathy Burns, Petitioner v. Rick Reed |
| Citations | 500 U.S. 478 (more) 111 S. Ct. 1934; 114 L. Ed. 2d 547; 1991 U.S. LEXIS 3018; 59 U.S.L.W. 4536; 91 Cal. Daily Op. Service 3961; 91 Daily Journal DAR 6290 |
| Holding | |
| A state prosecuting attorney is absolutely immune from liability for damages under § 1983 for participating in a probable cause hearing, but not for giving legal advice to the police. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | White, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter |
| Concur/dissent | Scalia, joined by Blackmun; Marshall (part III) |
| Laws applied | |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 | |
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
References edit
External links edit
- Text of Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478 (1991) is available from: Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |