# Supremes limits auto seareched following arrests



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

The Supreme Court ruled on Arizona v. Gant this morning and imposed , new limitations on the searching an automobile following a stop/arrest. Previously under New York v. Belton, the rule was that the police can search the passenger area of a car when they arrest an occupant or recent occupant of the vehicle. But in a 5 to 4 vote, the Supremes added a new limitation: The police can only search a car following arrest if they could have a reasonable belief that 1) the person arrested "could have accessed the part of his car at the time of the search" or 2) evidence of the offense for which he was arrested might have been found in the part they want to search.

In the majority opinion by Justice Stevens, the Court concluded that these limitations are proper because the absence of these limitations simply gives the police too much power, power that cannot be justified by the reasonableness requirement of the Fourth Amendment. Stare decisis did not prevail because the majority clearly felt that searches absent an evidentiary or police safety nexus are unconstitutional, and that the police are just going to far relying on the traditional broad reading of it.

The majority is Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, Scalia, and Thomas. Breyer voted with Roberts, Alito and Kennedy in the dissent. Rather a strange split.

I guess the proverbial broken tal ilight is no longer probable cause to search the entire car (except I suppose the bulb for many tail lights is accessed by the trunk) LOL.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-542.pdf

During the upcoming national emergency, unlike police, Obama Yutes won't need warrants.


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

I'm typing this completely from memory, but at first glance, this simply seems to fall in line with what Massachusetts already practices: Search Incident to Arrest (SIA) searches are for weapons, contraband, and fruits of the crime. Since there are no "fruits" for a suspended license such as in this case, you left with the first two. If the guy's handcuffed, your SOL on SIA to the vehicle as you've pretty much always been.

I NEVER rely on SIA searches; too many holes. MV Excepetion and consent are much more straight forward and easier to articulate, and have fewer nuances. And if you plan on towing the car, you have to inventory it anyways.

In contrast, SIA serches have exceptions to the exceptions, which I don't bother with 99.9% of the time. If you really want to use SIA, for say "bright line" (container w/in the vehicle) access, remember you can search incident to the arrest _before_ you actually throw the cuffs on the subject. As the suject at that time could be able to access a weapon in the vehicle or destroy evidence or contraband.



> Respondent Gant was arrested for driving on a suspended license, handcuffed, and locked in a patrol car before officers searched his car and found cocaine in a jacket pocket. The Arizona trial court denied his motion to suppress the evidence, and he was convicted of drug of-fenses. Reversing, the State Supreme Court distinguished New York v. Belton, 453 U. S. 454-which held that police may search the pas-senger compartment of a vehicle and any containers therein as a con-temporaneous incident of a recent occupant's lawful arrest-on the ground that it concerned the scope of a search incident to arrest but did not answer the question whether officers may conduct such asearch once the scene has been secured. Because Chimel v. Califor-nia, 395 U. S. 752, requires that a search incident to arrest be justi-fied by either the interest in officer safety or the interest in preserving evidence and the circumstances of Gant's arrest implicatedneither of those interests, the State Supreme Court found the search unreasonable.
> 
> Held: Police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if it is reasonable to believe that the arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest. Pp. 5-18.
> 
> ...


----------



## Guest (Apr 21, 2009)

Obie, I agree. SIA, exception, & inventory all seem to still be in play.


----------



## csauce777 (Jan 10, 2005)

My department has a formal, container specific motor vehicle inventory policy requiring us to "inventory" the contents of any motor vehicle to be towed


----------

