Gerstein v. Pugh
Facts
Florida allowed most criminal prosecutions to proceed by prosecutor's information without a prior preliminary hearing or leave of court. Under Florida practice, once an information was filed, an arrested person could be detained for a substantial period pending trial without any judicial determination of probable cause, except possibly through delayed procedures such as a hearing after 30 days or arraignment often occurring a month or more after arrest. Respondents were arrested in Dade County, charged by information, and held in custody without a prompt judicial probable-cause determination. They sought only an order requiring such a determination, not release from custody.
Issue
Whether a person arrested and held for trial under a prosecutor's information is constitutionally entitled to a judicial determination of probable cause for pretrial restraint of liberty. If so, whether the Constitution requires that determination to take the form of a full adversary hearing with counsel, confrontation, cross-examination, and compulsory process.
Rule
The Fourth Amendment requires a fair and reliable judicial determination of probable cause as a condition for any significant pretrial restraint of liberty following arrest, and that determination must be made by a judicial officer either before or promptly after arrest. The Constitution does not require that this probable-cause determination be conducted as a full adversary hearing, and prosecutorial judgment alone is not a sufficient substitute for a neutral and detached magistrate.
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
- The court's holding and reasoning
- Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
- 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Test yourself
Was Lena's pretrial detention constitutional under the governing Fourth Amendment rule?