New York v. Harris
1990 United States Supreme Court case
New York v. Harris, 495 U.S. 14 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether a confession obtained at a police station is admissible when the arrest was made illegally inside the suspect's home without a warrant—violating Payton v. New York. Bernard Harris was arrested in his apartment without a warrant (though police had probable cause for the murder of Thelma Staton). When police entered his apartment, Harris was read his Miranda Rights and he answered questions there. He was then taken to the police station, where he gave a written confession that was later used to convict him. The court ruled 5-4 that the confession was admissible because it was made outside of the home after Miranda rights warnings, and was not protected by Payton. The ruling narrowed the exclusionary rule, which prevents use of evidence obtained through unconstitutional means.
“New York v. Harris” enters the record as 1990 United States Supreme Court case. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what York, Harris and United can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“New York v. Harris” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, York, Harris and United provides the most credible route into that argument.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q19073456. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1990.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “New York v. Harris”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow New York v. Harris primary sources, New York v. Harris archive and York research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “New York v. Harris”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “New York v. Harris” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.