United States v. Miller

Supreme Court of the United States · 1976 · Criminal Procedure

425 U.S. 435 (1976)

Updated July 27, 2026

Criminal ProcedureFourth AmendmentBank recordsSubpoenas duces tecumexpectation of privacythird-party doctrineBank Secrecy Actsubpoena duces tecum

Facts

After investigators discovered a distillery and untaxed whiskey linked to respondent, Treasury agents served grand jury subpoenas on two banks where respondent had accounts. The banks, without notifying respondent, showed agents microfilm account records and provided copies of checks, deposit slips, financial statements, and monthly statements; the records had been maintained pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act. Respondent moved to suppress the documents, arguing that the subpoenas were defective. The records were used in the investigation and copies of checks were introduced at trial to prove overt acts in the conspiracy.

Issue

Whether a bank depositor has a protectable Fourth Amendment interest in bank records maintained by banks and obtained by Government subpoena, so that he may challenge the subpoenas and suppress the records. Also, whether the Bank Secrecy Act's recordkeeping requirements create such a Fourth Amendment interest where none otherwise existed.

Rule

Bank records of a depositor's accounts are the business records of the bank, not the depositor's private papers, and a depositor has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information voluntarily conveyed to the bank and exposed to bank employees in the ordinary course of business. Therefore, the issuance of a subpoena to a bank to obtain those records does not implicate the depositor's Fourth Amendment rights, even when the records are maintained pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act.

🔒

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

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Phoenix, federal prosecutors investigating an illegal cash-skimming scheme served a subpoena duces tecum on Desert Mesa Bank for records of Lena Ortiz's checking account, including monthly statements, deposited-check images, and signature cards. The bank complied without telling Ortiz, and the government later used the records at trial.

Ortiz moves to suppress the records on Fourth Amendment grounds, arguing they revealed intimate details of her finances. How should the court rule?

Explanation. The motion should be denied. The majority held that account statements, checks, deposit slips, and similar materials maintained by a bank are the bank's business records, not the depositor's private papers. Because the depositor voluntarily conveys the information to the bank and exposes it to bank employees in the ordinary course of business, the depositor has no legitimate expectation of privacy in those contents for Fourth Amendment purposes.