Step away from the car: Rare Fourth Amendment victory.

AuthorSullum, Jacob
PositionCitings - Vehicle searches

IN AUGUST 1999, when police saw Rodney Gant pull into the driveway of his Tucson home, they arrested him for driving with a suspended license. After handcuffing Gant and locking him in a cruiser, Officer Todd Griffith searched the car, finding a bag of cocaine in the pocket of a jacket on the backseat. Asked at an evidentiary hearing why he searched the vehicle, Griffith replied, "Because the law says we can do it."

Not anymore. In April the U.S. Supreme Court said police may no longer routinely search the vehicles of recently arrested people, a practice that was considered constitutional for nearly three decades. The ruling in Arizona v. Gant was a rare departure from a long line of cases in which the Court has whittled away at the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures.

The Court has said warrants are not required for "searches incident to arrest" because they may be necessary to stop arrestees from grabbing weapons or concealing evidence of their crimes. Neither concern is plausible when an arrestee, like Gant, has been handcuffed and locked up before the search takes place. Yet that is by far the most common scenario when police...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT