505:. Chief Justice Roberts also noted that the purpose of the Fourth Amendment was to protect individual privacy, but any person who shares a dwelling (or, as Chief Justice Roberts points out, a locker or a hard drive) with another person may anticipate that the other person sharing access to their belongings might turn them over to authorities. In short, to share a home with someone is to surrender privacy as to that person, who might then consent to an invasion of it. Roberts also asserted that the majority opinion was arbitrary, as previous case law had held an objecting resident who was being held in the police car, as opposed to in the house, could be ignored with respect to the search.
31:
521:
that power . . . There is nothing new or surprising in the proposition that our unchanging
Constitution refers to other bodies of law that might themselves change . . . Finally, I must express grave doubt that today’s decision deserves Justice Stevens’ celebration as part of the forward march of women’s equality. Given the usual patterns of domestic violence, how often can police be expected to encounter the situation in which a man urges them to enter the home while a woman simultaneously demands that they stay out?
343:
troubles. She mentioned the marital problems, saying that she and their son had only recently returned after a several weeks' stay with her parents. Shortly after the policemen arrived, Scott
Randolph returned, explaining to them that he had removed their son to a neighbor's house, worried that his wife might again take the boy out of the U.S.; Scott Randolph denied using cocaine, and countered that it was his wife, Janet, who used illegal drugs and abused alcohol.
363:. When Sergeant Murray returned to the house, Janet Randolph withdrew her consent to searching the house. The police took the drinking straw to the police station, along with the arrested occupants. After obtaining a search warrant, they returned to the Randolph house and seized further evidence of illegal drug use, on the basis of which Scott Randolph was indicted for possession of cocaine.
442:" view of the Fourth Amendment, noting that the search would remain prohibited had the Court attempted to apply the law based upon the meaning intended by the Founding Fathers, noting that when the Fourth Amendment was written, the law of the time would have made the husband the "master of his house":
350:
Murray, went with Janet
Randolph to reclaim the Randolph child from the neighbor; when they returned, she renewed her complaints about her husband's drug use and volunteered that there were “items of drug evidence” in the house. Sergeant Murray asked Scott Randolph for permission to search the house;
520:
The issue of who could give such consent generally depended, in turn, on “historical and legal refinements” of property law. As property law developed, individuals who previously could not authorize a search might become able to do so, and those who once could grant such consent might no longer have
408:
the police obtained voluntary consent from a co-occupant at the residence and found evidence implicating another resident who was not present when the police obtained consent. The Court said that the present case was different from the previous two in that the co-resident was not present to refuse
383:
The question here is whether such an evidentiary seizure is likewise lawful with the permission of one occupant when the other, who later seeks to suppress the evidence, is present at the scene and expressly refuses to consent. We hold that, in the circumstances here at issue, a physically present
342:
On the morning of July 6, she complained to the police that, after a domestic dispute, her husband had taken their son from the marital residence, and when the police reached the
Randolph house, she told them that her husband was a cocaine user whose drug use habit had caused the family financial
446:
In the 18th century . . . given the then-prevailing dramatic differences between the property rights of the husband and the far lesser rights of the wife, only the consent of the husband would matter. Whether "the master of the house" consented or objected, his decision would control. Thus, if
447:"original understanding" were to govern the outcome of this case, the search was clearly invalid because the husband did not consent. History, however, is not dispositive, because it is now clear, as a matter of constitutional law, that the male and the female are equal partners.
366:
At court, Scott
Randolph moved to suppress the evidence, as products of a warrantless search of his house, unauthorized by his wife's consent over his express refusal. The trial court denied the motion, ruling that Janet Randolph had "common authority" to consent to the search.
489:" present here do not suffice to justify abandoning the Fourth Amendment's traditional hostility to police entry into a home without a warrant. I stress the totality of the circumstances, however, because, were the circumstances to change significantly, so should the result.
460:
The search at issue was a search solely for evidence. The objecting party was present and made his objection known clearly and directly to the officers seeking to enter the house. The officers did not justify their search on grounds of possible evidence destruction. Cf.
351:
he refused. The sergeant then asked Janet
Randolph's consent to search the Randolph house, which she readily gave, and then led him to an upstairs bedroom she identified as Scott's, where the sergeant noticed a section of a
1558:
540:(2014), the Supreme Court held that, when the resident who objects to the search of the dwelling is removed for objectively reasonable purposes (such as lawful arrest), the remaining resident may validly consent to search.
144:
In the circumstances here at issue, a physically present co-occupant's stated refusal to permit entry prevails, rendering the warrantless search unreasonable and invalid as to him. Supreme Court of
Georgia
3116:
2392:
479:, 384 U.S. 757, 770–771 (1966). And, as far as the record reveals, the officers might easily have secured the premises and sought a warrant permitting them to enter. See
359:. He then left the house to get an evidence bag from his patrol car, and to call the district attorney's office, which instructed him to stop the search and apply for a
2977:
1518:
699:
549:
316:
82:
339:, taking their son and some belongings. In July, she returned to the Americus house with the child; the record does not register her motive for returning.
578:
776:
284:
530:
In August 2006, a
California trial court suppressed evidence after police acquired an absent resident's permission to enter a dwelling, but failed to
1452:
1131:
596:
Recent Case: California
Superior Court Holds That the Knock-and-Announce Requirement Is Applicable When an Absent Third Party Has Consented to Search
3121:
2298:
469:
456:
Justice Breyer's concurrence stressed that the majority opinion was rather specific, writing "the circumstances here include the following":
2290:
887:
2239:
3111:
2338:
1679:
554:
2745:
767:
3126:
2435:
2306:
2210:
127:
384:
co- occupant's stated refusal to permit entry prevails, rendering the warrantless search unreasonable and invalid as to him.
1963:
331:
Respondent Scott
Randolph and his wife, Janet Randolph, separated in late May 2001, when she left the marital residence in
379:, the Court held a co-resident could refuse consent to a police search, even if another resident consented. Specifically:
2951:
2902:
298:
35:
2478:
1015:
895:
423:, who had yet to be confirmed when the case was argued, did not participate in the argument or decision of the case.
309:
while another resident objects. The Court distinguished this case from the "co-occupant consent rule" established in
2194:
2178:
2218:
1364:
2606:
2322:
2247:
2202:
1052:
573:
2803:
2486:
1315:
927:
486:
2400:
903:
760:
2330:
1980:
1115:
815:
594:
2633:
2095:
1068:
839:
2862:
2028:
2004:
1996:
1972:
1834:
1781:
1706:
1633:
1614:
1259:
1243:
823:
463:
719:
2795:
2149:
1879:
1789:
1275:
1163:
396:
311:
438:
separately concurred with the Court majority opinion. Justice Stevens's concurrence attacked the "
413:
the co-occupant who later objected to the search was asleep in a bedroom within the residence; in
3045:
2822:
2454:
2346:
2169:
2063:
1870:
1813:
1550:
1476:
1468:
1444:
1396:
1139:
1091:
980:
972:
879:
855:
753:
536:
475:
613:
Binnall, James M. (2006). "He's on Parole… But You Still Can't Come in: A Parolee's Reaction to
2737:
2552:
2274:
2186:
1858:
1730:
1420:
1404:
1283:
1171:
1044:
911:
863:
513:
115:
2921:
2787:
2625:
2282:
2103:
1927:
1903:
1797:
1579:
1206:
1155:
1007:
988:
871:
847:
831:
807:
703:
390:
320:
74:
710:
3037:
2834:
2778:
2571:
2365:
1988:
1911:
1850:
1773:
1542:
1336:
1035:
963:
919:
481:
745:
8:
2757:
2678:
2654:
2645:
2590:
2536:
2255:
2157:
2079:
2044:
1951:
1935:
1895:
1887:
1825:
1754:
1428:
1299:
1291:
935:
200:
2889:
2470:
2462:
2314:
2141:
2012:
1722:
1714:
1654:
1645:
1570:
1534:
1526:
1460:
1388:
1372:
1147:
728:
531:
323:
164 (1974), which permitted one resident to consent in absence of the co-occupant.
63:
3072:
2766:
2721:
2494:
2384:
2230:
1919:
1746:
1307:
1267:
1198:
1060:
676:
651:
626:
431:
332:
168:
3080:
3029:
2686:
2662:
2544:
2427:
2122:
2087:
1943:
1842:
1738:
1698:
1595:
1484:
1436:
1412:
1251:
1179:
1123:
1023:
943:
306:
77:
2959:
2913:
2870:
2843:
2670:
2598:
2419:
2036:
2020:
951:
582:
498:
192:
180:
130:, April 28, 2004; affirmed, 604 S.E.2d 835 (Ga. 2004); cert. granted, sub. nom.
2983:
2071:
1587:
1380:
1231:
1099:
435:
360:
352:
302:
204:
176:
3105:
1505:
1356:
1335:
1107:
680:
655:
630:
502:
642:: A Murky Refinement of the Fourth Amendment Third-Party Consent Doctrine".
3053:
420:
376:
212:
188:
160:
737:
417:, the later-objecting co-occupant was located in a nearby police vehicle.
305:, police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident
439:
1340:
667:: Checking Potential Defendants' Fourth Amendment Rights at the Door".
123:
93:
516:
wrote a short dissent as a response to Justice Stevens's concurrence:
501:
feared the Court's ruling would limit the ability of police to combat
89:
1344:
347:
356:
274:
Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
336:
119:
30:
534:
before entering to discover another resident using drugs. In
775:
388:
The Court's decision distinguished its previous rulings in
3117:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
1678:
550:
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 547
229:
Souter, joined by Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer
493:
1453:Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada
789:
3103:
3011:
426:
110:Defendant's motion to suppress evidence denied,
451:
297:, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the
2299:National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab
761:
575:The Supreme Court, 2005 Term — Leading Cases,
619:Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy
2240:Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz
508:
2339:Safford Unified School District v. Redding
768:
754:
470:Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.
2291:Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Ass'n
888:Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Ass'n
555:List of United States Supreme Court cases
2746:Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States
662:
3122:United States Fourth Amendment case law
2436:Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders
1504:
612:
370:
355:with a powder residue he suspected was
335:, and went to stay with her parents in
3104:
2729:
3010:
2709:
2517:
2358:Property of probationers and parolees
2307:Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton
2211:United States v. Montoya De Hernandez
1677:
1503:
1334:
1229:
788:
749:
637:
18:2006 United States Supreme Court case
2564:Seizure of premises awaiting warrant
13:
2952:Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents
1626:Warrants directed at third parties
1230:
606:
485:, 531 U.S. 326 (2001). Thus, the "
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
3138:
3112:United States Supreme Court cases
2479:County of Riverside v. McLaughlin
2267:Students, employees, and patients
2056:Breathalyzers, blood samples, DNA
1680:Exceptions to warrant requirement
1016:Dow Chemical Co. v. United States
896:United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez
706:103 (2006) is available from:
688:
2529:Distinguishing stops and arrests
2195:United States v. Martinez-Fuerte
2179:Almeida-Sanchez v. United States
525:
467:, 541 U.S. 615, 620–622 (2004);
29:
3022:Unreasonable search and seizure
2219:United States v. Flores-Montano
1607:Neutral and detached magistrate
1365:United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
599:, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 836 (2007).
494:Chief Justice Roberts's dissent
3127:2006 in United States case law
2323:Ferguson v. City of Charleston
2248:City of Indianapolis v. Edmond
1559:Los Angeles County v. Rettelle
777:United States Fourth Amendment
588:
567:
118:Superior Court; reversed, 590
54:Georgia v. Scott Fitz Randolph
1:
2618:Detention during vehicle stop
2487:Atwater v. City of Lago Vista
2412:Searches in jails and prisons
1316:District of Columbia v. Wesby
790:Scope of the Fourth Amendment
585:120 Harv. L. Rev. 163 (2006).
560:
487:totality of the circumstances
427:Justice Stevens's concurrence
326:
3012:Incorporation against States
2710:
2583:Detention incident to search
2518:
2401:City of Los Angeles v. Patel
473:, 489 U.S. 602, 623 (1989);
452:Justice Breyer's concurrence
375:In a 5-3 opinion written by
7:
2331:Board of Education v. Earls
1981:United States v. Rabinowitz
1964:Searches incident to arrest
1116:United States v. Mendenhall
543:
10:
3143:
2634:Rodriguez v. United States
2377:Administrative inspections
2096:Birchfield v. North Dakota
1069:Carpenter v. United States
840:Silverman v. United States
738:Oyez (oral argument audio)
409:consent to the search. In
400:, 415 U.S. 164 (1974). In
394:, 497 U.S. 177 (1990) and
3064:
3021:
3017:
3006:
2970:
2943:
2936:
2900:
2881:
2863:Wong Sun v. United States
2854:
2833:
2814:
2777:
2756:
2720:
2716:
2705:
2644:
2617:
2582:
2563:
2528:
2524:
2513:
2446:
2411:
2393:Camara v. Municipal Court
2376:
2357:
2266:
2229:
2168:
2133:
2114:
2055:
2029:Thornton v. United States
2005:United States v. Chadwick
1997:United States v. Robinson
1973:Trupiano v. United States
1962:
1869:
1835:Coolidge v. New Hampshire
1824:
1782:Schneckloth v. Bustamonte
1765:
1707:United States v. Chadwick
1690:
1686:
1673:
1644:
1634:Zurcher v. Stanford Daily
1625:
1615:Coolidge v. New Hampshire
1606:
1569:
1513:
1499:
1351:
1330:
1260:Spinelli v. United States
1244:Brinegar v. United States
1238:
1225:
1191:Fourth Amendment standing
1190:
1083:
1034:
999:
962:
824:Olmstead v. United States
799:
795:
784:
464:Thornton v. United States
283:
278:
273:
265:
257:
253:Roberts, joined by Scalia
249:
241:
233:
225:
220:
154:
149:
143:
138:
122:834 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003);
106:
101:
69:
59:
49:
42:
28:
23:
2796:Herring v. United States
2150:South Dakota v. Opperman
1880:Carroll v. United States
1790:United States v. Matlock
1519:Johnson v. United States
1341:Investigative detentions
1276:Ornelas v. United States
1164:United States v. Drayton
509:Justice Scalia's dissent
397:United States v. Matlock
312:United States v. Matlock
134:, 125 S. Ct. 1840 (2005)
128:Supreme Court of Georgia
3046:Elkins v. United States
2823:Murray v. United States
2607:Bailey v. United States
2455:United States v. Watson
2347:City of Ontario v. Quon
2203:United States v. Ramsey
2064:Schmerber v. California
1814:Fernandez v. California
1551:United States v. Grubbs
1477:Heien v. North Carolina
1469:Navarette v. California
1445:United States v. Arvizu
1397:United States v. Cortez
1140:California v. Hodari D.
1092:Counselman v. Hitchcock
1053:United States v. Miller
981:Oliver v. United States
973:Hester v. United States
880:California v. Greenwood
856:United States v. Knotts
638:Black, C. Dan (2006). "
581:April 24, 2022, at the
537:Fernandez v. California
476:Schmerber v. California
43:Argued November 8, 2005
2804:Davis v. United States
2738:Weeks v. United States
2553:United States v. Place
2275:New Jersey v. T. L. O.
2187:United States v. Ortiz
1859:Minnesota v. Dickerson
1731:Brigham City v. Stuart
1421:Minnesota v. Dickerson
1405:United States v. Place
1284:Whren v. United States
1172:Brendlin v. California
1045:United States v. White
928:United States v. Jones
912:Kyllo v. United States
864:United States v. Place
663:Wineholt, A. (2006). "
523:
514:Justice Antonin Scalia
491:
449:
386:
346:One of the policemen,
307:consents to the search
96:2498; 74 U.S.L.W. 4176
45:Decided March 22, 2006
2922:Kimmelman v. Morrison
2788:United States v. Leon
2758:Impeachment exception
2626:Pennsylvania v. Mimms
2104:Mitchell v. Wisconsin
1928:California v. Acevedo
1904:United States v. Ross
1798:Illinois v. Rodriguez
1691:Exigent circumstances
1580:Boyd v. United States
1207:Byrd v. United States
1156:Soldal v. Cook County
1084:Definition of seizure
1008:California v. Ciraolo
989:United States v. Dunn
904:Bond v. United States
872:United States v. Karo
848:Katz v. United States
832:Abel v. United States
808:Boyd v. United States
518:
499:Chief Justice Roberts
458:
444:
391:Illinois v. Rodriguez
381:
285:U.S. Const. amend. IV
88:126 S. Ct. 1515; 164
3065:Warrant requirements
3038:Rochin v. California
2835:Inevitable discovery
2779:Good-faith exception
2572:Illinois v. McArthur
2366:Samson v. California
1989:Chimel v. California
1912:California v. Carney
1851:Horton v. California
1774:Stoner v. California
1543:Maryland v. Garrison
1337:Reasonable suspicion
1036:Third-party doctrine
964:Open-fields doctrine
920:Illinois v. Caballes
816:United States v. Lee
800:Definition of search
482:Illinois v. McArthur
371:Opinion of the Court
301:held that without a
2679:Plumhoff v. Rickard
2655:Tennessee v. Garner
2591:Michigan v. Summers
2537:Dunaway v. New York
2447:Warrantless arrests
2256:Illinois v. Lidster
2158:Colorado v. Bertine
2080:Missouri v. McNeely
2045:Riley v. California
1952:Collins v. Virginia
1936:Wyoming v. Houghton
1896:Arkansas v. Sanders
1888:Chambers v. Maroney
1806:Georgia v. Randolph
1755:Lange v. California
1429:Illinois v. Wardlow
1300:Devenpeck v. Alford
1292:Maryland v. Pringle
1000:Aerial surveillance
936:Florida v. Jardines
696:Georgia v. Randolph
669:Maryland Law Review
665:Georgia v. Randolph
640:Georgia v. Randolph
615:Georgia v. Randolph
294:Georgia v. Randolph
201:Ruth Bader Ginsburg
132:Georgia v. Randolph
24:Georgia v. Randolph
2890:Hudson v. Michigan
2815:Independent source
2471:Welsh v. Wisconsin
2463:Payton v. New York
2315:Chandler v. Miller
2283:O'Connor v. Ortega
2142:Cady v. Dombrowski
2134:Inventory searches
2013:New York v. Belton
1723:Welsh v. Wisconsin
1715:Payton v. New York
1655:Wilson v. Arkansas
1646:Knock-and-announce
1571:Mere evidence rule
1535:Ybarra v. Illinois
1527:Franks v. Delaware
1461:Arizona v. Johnson
1389:Ybarra v. Illinois
1373:Delaware v. Prouse
1148:Florida v. Bostick
644:Gonzaga Law Review
532:knock-and-announce
299:U.S. Supreme Court
165:Associate Justices
3099:
3098:
3095:
3094:
3091:
3090:
3073:Ker v. California
3002:
3001:
2998:
2997:
2994:
2993:
2932:
2931:
2882:No-knock searches
2767:James v. Illinois
2722:Exclusionary rule
2701:
2700:
2697:
2696:
2509:
2508:
2505:
2504:
2495:Virginia v. Moore
2385:Frank v. Maryland
2115:Protective sweeps
1920:Florida v. Jimeno
1747:Caniglia v. Strom
1669:
1668:
1665:
1664:
1495:
1494:
1326:
1325:
1308:Florida v. Harris
1268:Illinois v. Gates
1221:
1220:
1217:
1216:
1199:Rakas v. Illinois
1079:
1078:
1061:Smith v. Maryland
503:domestic violence
333:Americus, Georgia
290:
289:
112:State v. Randolph
3134:
3081:Aguilar v. Texas
3030:Wolf v. Colorado
3019:
3018:
3008:
3007:
2978:42 U.S.C. § 1983
2941:
2940:
2727:
2726:
2718:
2717:
2707:
2706:
2687:Mullenix v. Luna
2663:Graham v. Connor
2545:Florida v. Royer
2526:
2525:
2515:
2514:
2428:Hudson v. Palmer
2123:Maryland v. Buie
2088:Maryland v. King
1944:Florida v. White
1871:Vehicle searches
1843:Arizona v. Hicks
1766:Consent searches
1739:Kentucky v. King
1699:Warden v. Hayden
1688:
1687:
1675:
1674:
1596:Warden v. Hayden
1567:
1566:
1501:
1500:
1485:Kansas v. Glover
1437:Florida v. J. L.
1413:Michigan v. Long
1332:
1331:
1252:Aguilar v. Texas
1227:
1226:
1180:Torres v. Madrid
1124:Florida v. Royer
1024:Florida v. Riley
960:
959:
944:Klayman v. Obama
797:
796:
786:
785:
770:
763:
756:
747:
746:
742:
736:
733:
727:
724:
718:
715:
709:
684:
659:
634:
600:
592:
586:
571:
432:Justices Stevens
150:Court membership
33:
32:
21:
20:
3142:
3141:
3137:
3136:
3135:
3133:
3132:
3131:
3102:
3101:
3100:
3087:
3060:
3013:
2990:
2966:
2960:Egbert v. Boule
2928:
2914:Stone v. Powell
2896:
2877:
2871:Utah v. Strieff
2850:
2844:Nix v. Williams
2829:
2810:
2773:
2752:
2712:
2693:
2671:Scott v. Harris
2646:Excessive force
2640:
2613:
2599:Muehler v. Mena
2578:
2559:
2520:
2501:
2442:
2420:Bell v. Wolfish
2407:
2372:
2353:
2262:
2225:
2170:Border searches
2164:
2129:
2110:
2051:
2037:Arizona v. Gant
2021:Knowles v. Iowa
1958:
1865:
1820:
1761:
1682:
1661:
1640:
1621:
1602:
1565:
1509:
1491:
1347:
1322:
1234:
1213:
1186:
1075:
1030:
995:
958:
952:ACLU v. Clapper
791:
780:
774:
740:
734:
731:
725:
722:
716:
713:
707:
691:
609:
607:Further reading
604:
603:
593:
589:
583:Wayback Machine
572:
568:
563:
546:
528:
511:
496:
454:
429:
373:
329:
203:
193:Clarence Thomas
191:
181:Anthony Kennedy
179:
169:John P. Stevens
97:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
3140:
3130:
3129:
3124:
3119:
3114:
3097:
3096:
3093:
3092:
3089:
3088:
3086:
3085:
3077:
3068:
3066:
3062:
3061:
3059:
3058:
3050:
3042:
3034:
3025:
3023:
3015:
3014:
3004:
3003:
3000:
2999:
2996:
2995:
2992:
2991:
2989:
2988:
2984:Monroe v. Pape
2980:
2974:
2972:
2968:
2967:
2965:
2964:
2956:
2947:
2945:
2938:
2934:
2933:
2930:
2929:
2927:
2926:
2918:
2909:
2907:
2898:
2897:
2895:
2894:
2885:
2883:
2879:
2878:
2876:
2875:
2867:
2858:
2856:
2852:
2851:
2849:
2848:
2839:
2837:
2831:
2830:
2828:
2827:
2818:
2816:
2812:
2811:
2809:
2808:
2800:
2792:
2783:
2781:
2775:
2774:
2772:
2771:
2762:
2760:
2754:
2753:
2751:
2750:
2742:
2733:
2731:
2724:
2714:
2713:
2703:
2702:
2699:
2698:
2695:
2694:
2692:
2691:
2683:
2675:
2667:
2659:
2650:
2648:
2642:
2641:
2639:
2638:
2630:
2621:
2619:
2615:
2614:
2612:
2611:
2603:
2595:
2586:
2584:
2580:
2579:
2577:
2576:
2567:
2565:
2561:
2560:
2558:
2557:
2549:
2541:
2532:
2530:
2522:
2521:
2511:
2510:
2507:
2506:
2503:
2502:
2500:
2499:
2491:
2483:
2475:
2467:
2459:
2450:
2448:
2444:
2443:
2441:
2440:
2432:
2424:
2415:
2413:
2409:
2408:
2406:
2405:
2397:
2389:
2380:
2378:
2374:
2373:
2371:
2370:
2361:
2359:
2355:
2354:
2352:
2351:
2343:
2335:
2327:
2319:
2311:
2303:
2295:
2287:
2279:
2270:
2268:
2264:
2263:
2261:
2260:
2252:
2244:
2235:
2233:
2227:
2226:
2224:
2223:
2215:
2207:
2199:
2191:
2183:
2174:
2172:
2166:
2165:
2163:
2162:
2154:
2146:
2137:
2135:
2131:
2130:
2128:
2127:
2118:
2116:
2112:
2111:
2109:
2108:
2100:
2092:
2084:
2076:
2072:Cupp v. Murphy
2068:
2059:
2057:
2053:
2052:
2050:
2049:
2041:
2033:
2025:
2017:
2009:
2001:
1993:
1985:
1977:
1968:
1966:
1960:
1959:
1957:
1956:
1948:
1940:
1932:
1924:
1916:
1908:
1900:
1892:
1884:
1875:
1873:
1867:
1866:
1864:
1863:
1855:
1847:
1839:
1830:
1828:
1822:
1821:
1819:
1818:
1810:
1802:
1794:
1786:
1778:
1769:
1767:
1763:
1762:
1760:
1759:
1751:
1743:
1735:
1727:
1719:
1711:
1703:
1694:
1692:
1684:
1683:
1671:
1670:
1667:
1666:
1663:
1662:
1660:
1659:
1650:
1648:
1642:
1641:
1639:
1638:
1629:
1627:
1623:
1622:
1620:
1619:
1610:
1608:
1604:
1603:
1601:
1600:
1592:
1588:Hale v. Henkel
1584:
1575:
1573:
1564:
1563:
1555:
1547:
1539:
1531:
1523:
1514:
1511:
1510:
1497:
1496:
1493:
1492:
1490:
1489:
1481:
1473:
1465:
1457:
1449:
1441:
1433:
1425:
1417:
1409:
1401:
1393:
1385:
1381:Brown v. Texas
1377:
1369:
1361:
1352:
1349:
1348:
1328:
1327:
1324:
1323:
1321:
1320:
1312:
1304:
1296:
1288:
1280:
1272:
1264:
1256:
1248:
1239:
1236:
1235:
1232:Probable cause
1223:
1222:
1219:
1218:
1215:
1214:
1212:
1211:
1203:
1194:
1192:
1188:
1187:
1185:
1184:
1176:
1168:
1160:
1152:
1144:
1136:
1132:INS v. Delgado
1128:
1120:
1112:
1104:
1100:Hale v. Henkel
1096:
1087:
1085:
1081:
1080:
1077:
1076:
1074:
1073:
1065:
1057:
1049:
1040:
1038:
1032:
1031:
1029:
1028:
1020:
1012:
1003:
1001:
997:
996:
994:
993:
985:
977:
968:
966:
957:
956:
948:
940:
932:
924:
916:
908:
900:
892:
884:
876:
868:
860:
852:
844:
836:
828:
820:
812:
803:
801:
793:
792:
782:
781:
773:
772:
765:
758:
750:
744:
743:
720:Google Scholar
690:
689:External links
687:
686:
685:
660:
635:
608:
605:
602:
601:
587:
565:
564:
562:
559:
558:
557:
552:
545:
542:
527:
524:
510:
507:
495:
492:
453:
450:
428:
425:
377:Justice Souter
372:
369:
361:search warrant
353:drinking straw
328:
325:
303:search warrant
288:
287:
281:
280:
276:
275:
271:
270:
267:
263:
262:
259:
255:
254:
251:
247:
246:
243:
239:
238:
235:
231:
230:
227:
223:
222:
218:
217:
216:
215:
205:Stephen Breyer
177:Antonin Scalia
166:
163:
158:
152:
151:
147:
146:
141:
140:
136:
135:
108:
104:
103:
99:
98:
87:
71:
67:
66:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3139:
3128:
3125:
3123:
3120:
3118:
3115:
3113:
3110:
3109:
3107:
3083:
3082:
3078:
3075:
3074:
3070:
3069:
3067:
3063:
3056:
3055:
3051:
3048:
3047:
3043:
3040:
3039:
3035:
3032:
3031:
3027:
3026:
3024:
3020:
3016:
3009:
3005:
2986:
2985:
2981:
2979:
2976:
2975:
2973:
2969:
2962:
2961:
2957:
2954:
2953:
2949:
2948:
2946:
2942:
2939:
2935:
2924:
2923:
2919:
2916:
2915:
2911:
2910:
2908:
2905:
2904:
2903:Habeas corpus
2899:
2892:
2891:
2887:
2886:
2884:
2880:
2873:
2872:
2868:
2865:
2864:
2860:
2859:
2857:
2853:
2846:
2845:
2841:
2840:
2838:
2836:
2832:
2825:
2824:
2820:
2819:
2817:
2813:
2806:
2805:
2801:
2798:
2797:
2793:
2790:
2789:
2785:
2784:
2782:
2780:
2776:
2769:
2768:
2764:
2763:
2761:
2759:
2755:
2748:
2747:
2743:
2740:
2739:
2735:
2734:
2732:
2728:
2725:
2723:
2719:
2715:
2708:
2704:
2689:
2688:
2684:
2681:
2680:
2676:
2673:
2672:
2668:
2665:
2664:
2660:
2657:
2656:
2652:
2651:
2649:
2647:
2643:
2636:
2635:
2631:
2628:
2627:
2623:
2622:
2620:
2616:
2609:
2608:
2604:
2601:
2600:
2596:
2593:
2592:
2588:
2587:
2585:
2581:
2574:
2573:
2569:
2568:
2566:
2562:
2555:
2554:
2550:
2547:
2546:
2542:
2539:
2538:
2534:
2533:
2531:
2527:
2523:
2516:
2512:
2497:
2496:
2492:
2489:
2488:
2484:
2481:
2480:
2476:
2473:
2472:
2468:
2465:
2464:
2460:
2457:
2456:
2452:
2451:
2449:
2445:
2438:
2437:
2433:
2430:
2429:
2425:
2422:
2421:
2417:
2416:
2414:
2410:
2403:
2402:
2398:
2395:
2394:
2390:
2387:
2386:
2382:
2381:
2379:
2375:
2368:
2367:
2363:
2362:
2360:
2356:
2349:
2348:
2344:
2341:
2340:
2336:
2333:
2332:
2328:
2325:
2324:
2320:
2317:
2316:
2312:
2309:
2308:
2304:
2301:
2300:
2296:
2293:
2292:
2288:
2285:
2284:
2280:
2277:
2276:
2272:
2271:
2269:
2265:
2258:
2257:
2253:
2250:
2249:
2245:
2242:
2241:
2237:
2236:
2234:
2232:
2228:
2221:
2220:
2216:
2213:
2212:
2208:
2205:
2204:
2200:
2197:
2196:
2192:
2189:
2188:
2184:
2181:
2180:
2176:
2175:
2173:
2171:
2167:
2160:
2159:
2155:
2152:
2151:
2147:
2144:
2143:
2139:
2138:
2136:
2132:
2125:
2124:
2120:
2119:
2117:
2113:
2106:
2105:
2101:
2098:
2097:
2093:
2090:
2089:
2085:
2082:
2081:
2077:
2074:
2073:
2069:
2066:
2065:
2061:
2060:
2058:
2054:
2047:
2046:
2042:
2039:
2038:
2034:
2031:
2030:
2026:
2023:
2022:
2018:
2015:
2014:
2010:
2007:
2006:
2002:
1999:
1998:
1994:
1991:
1990:
1986:
1983:
1982:
1978:
1975:
1974:
1970:
1969:
1967:
1965:
1961:
1954:
1953:
1949:
1946:
1945:
1941:
1938:
1937:
1933:
1930:
1929:
1925:
1922:
1921:
1917:
1914:
1913:
1909:
1906:
1905:
1901:
1898:
1897:
1893:
1890:
1889:
1885:
1882:
1881:
1877:
1876:
1874:
1872:
1868:
1861:
1860:
1856:
1853:
1852:
1848:
1845:
1844:
1840:
1837:
1836:
1832:
1831:
1829:
1827:
1823:
1816:
1815:
1811:
1808:
1807:
1803:
1800:
1799:
1795:
1792:
1791:
1787:
1784:
1783:
1779:
1776:
1775:
1771:
1770:
1768:
1764:
1757:
1756:
1752:
1749:
1748:
1744:
1741:
1740:
1736:
1733:
1732:
1728:
1725:
1724:
1720:
1717:
1716:
1712:
1709:
1708:
1704:
1701:
1700:
1696:
1695:
1693:
1689:
1685:
1681:
1676:
1672:
1657:
1656:
1652:
1651:
1649:
1647:
1643:
1636:
1635:
1631:
1630:
1628:
1624:
1617:
1616:
1612:
1611:
1609:
1605:
1598:
1597:
1593:
1590:
1589:
1585:
1582:
1581:
1577:
1576:
1574:
1572:
1568:
1561:
1560:
1556:
1553:
1552:
1548:
1545:
1544:
1540:
1537:
1536:
1532:
1529:
1528:
1524:
1521:
1520:
1516:
1515:
1512:
1507:
1502:
1498:
1487:
1486:
1482:
1479:
1478:
1474:
1471:
1470:
1466:
1463:
1462:
1458:
1455:
1454:
1450:
1447:
1446:
1442:
1439:
1438:
1434:
1431:
1430:
1426:
1423:
1422:
1418:
1415:
1414:
1410:
1407:
1406:
1402:
1399:
1398:
1394:
1391:
1390:
1386:
1383:
1382:
1378:
1375:
1374:
1370:
1367:
1366:
1362:
1359:
1358:
1357:Terry v. Ohio
1354:
1353:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1333:
1329:
1318:
1317:
1313:
1310:
1309:
1305:
1302:
1301:
1297:
1294:
1293:
1289:
1286:
1285:
1281:
1278:
1277:
1273:
1270:
1269:
1265:
1262:
1261:
1257:
1254:
1253:
1249:
1246:
1245:
1241:
1240:
1237:
1233:
1228:
1224:
1209:
1208:
1204:
1201:
1200:
1196:
1195:
1193:
1189:
1182:
1181:
1177:
1174:
1173:
1169:
1166:
1165:
1161:
1158:
1157:
1153:
1150:
1149:
1145:
1142:
1141:
1137:
1134:
1133:
1129:
1126:
1125:
1121:
1118:
1117:
1113:
1110:
1109:
1108:Terry v. Ohio
1105:
1102:
1101:
1097:
1094:
1093:
1089:
1088:
1086:
1082:
1071:
1070:
1066:
1063:
1062:
1058:
1055:
1054:
1050:
1047:
1046:
1042:
1041:
1039:
1037:
1033:
1026:
1025:
1021:
1018:
1017:
1013:
1010:
1009:
1005:
1004:
1002:
998:
991:
990:
986:
983:
982:
978:
975:
974:
970:
969:
967:
965:
961:
955:(D.D.C. 2013)
954:
953:
949:
947:(D.D.C. 2013)
946:
945:
941:
938:
937:
933:
930:
929:
925:
922:
921:
917:
914:
913:
909:
906:
905:
901:
898:
897:
893:
890:
889:
885:
882:
881:
877:
874:
873:
869:
866:
865:
861:
858:
857:
853:
850:
849:
845:
842:
841:
837:
834:
833:
829:
826:
825:
821:
818:
817:
813:
810:
809:
805:
804:
802:
798:
794:
787:
783:
778:
771:
766:
764:
759:
757:
752:
751:
748:
739:
730:
721:
712:
705:
701:
697:
693:
692:
682:
678:
674:
670:
666:
661:
657:
653:
649:
645:
641:
636:
632:
628:
624:
620:
616:
611:
610:
598:
597:
591:
584:
580:
577:
576:
570:
566:
556:
553:
551:
548:
547:
541:
539:
538:
533:
526:Further cases
522:
517:
515:
506:
504:
500:
490:
488:
484:
483:
478:
477:
472:
471:
466:
465:
457:
448:
443:
441:
437:
433:
424:
422:
421:Justice Alito
418:
416:
412:
407:
403:
399:
398:
393:
392:
385:
380:
378:
368:
364:
362:
358:
354:
349:
344:
340:
338:
334:
324:
322:
318:
314:
313:
308:
304:
300:
296:
295:
286:
282:
277:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
236:
232:
228:
224:
221:Case opinions
219:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
167:
164:
162:
159:
157:Chief Justice
156:
155:
153:
148:
142:
137:
133:
129:
125:
121:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
95:
91:
85:
84:
79:
76:
72:
68:
65:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
3079:
3071:
3054:Mapp v. Ohio
3052:
3044:
3036:
3028:
2982:
2958:
2950:
2920:
2912:
2901:
2888:
2869:
2861:
2842:
2821:
2802:
2794:
2786:
2765:
2744:
2736:
2685:
2677:
2669:
2661:
2653:
2632:
2624:
2605:
2597:
2589:
2570:
2551:
2543:
2535:
2493:
2485:
2477:
2469:
2461:
2453:
2434:
2426:
2418:
2399:
2391:
2383:
2364:
2345:
2337:
2329:
2321:
2313:
2305:
2297:
2289:
2281:
2273:
2254:
2246:
2238:
2217:
2209:
2201:
2193:
2185:
2177:
2156:
2148:
2140:
2121:
2102:
2094:
2086:
2078:
2070:
2062:
2043:
2035:
2027:
2019:
2011:
2003:
1995:
1987:
1979:
1971:
1950:
1942:
1934:
1926:
1918:
1910:
1902:
1894:
1886:
1878:
1857:
1849:
1841:
1833:
1812:
1805:
1804:
1796:
1788:
1780:
1772:
1753:
1745:
1737:
1729:
1721:
1713:
1705:
1697:
1653:
1632:
1613:
1594:
1586:
1578:
1557:
1549:
1541:
1533:
1525:
1517:
1483:
1475:
1467:
1459:
1451:
1443:
1435:
1427:
1419:
1411:
1403:
1395:
1387:
1379:
1371:
1363:
1355:
1314:
1306:
1298:
1290:
1282:
1274:
1266:
1258:
1250:
1242:
1205:
1197:
1178:
1170:
1162:
1154:
1146:
1138:
1130:
1122:
1114:
1106:
1098:
1090:
1067:
1059:
1051:
1043:
1022:
1014:
1006:
987:
979:
971:
950:
942:
934:
926:
918:
910:
902:
894:
886:
878:
870:
862:
854:
846:
838:
830:
822:
814:
806:
695:
672:
668:
664:
647:
643:
639:
622:
618:
614:
595:
590:
574:
569:
535:
529:
519:
512:
497:
480:
474:
468:
462:
459:
455:
445:
440:originalists
430:
419:
414:
410:
405:
401:
395:
389:
387:
382:
374:
365:
345:
341:
330:
310:
293:
292:
291:
279:Laws applied
213:Samuel Alito
208:
196:
189:David Souter
184:
172:
161:John Roberts
131:
111:
102:Case history
81:
53:
15:
2855:Attenuation
2231:Checkpoints
1508:requirement
242:Concurrence
234:Concurrence
3106:Categories
2937:Civil suit
1826:Plain view
561:References
327:Background
94:U.S. LEXIS
92:208; 2006
60:Docket no.
681:0025-4282
656:0046-6115
631:1524-3974
411:Rodriguez
402:Rodriguez
145:affirmed.
126:granted,
90:L. Ed. 2d
70:Citations
2711:Remedies
2519:Seizures
779:case law
694:Text of
579:Archived
544:See also
348:Sergeant
226:Majority
2944:Federal
2730:Origins
1506:Warrant
711:Findlaw
675:: 475.
650:: 321.
625:: 341.
415:Matlock
406:Matlock
357:cocaine
266:Dissent
258:Dissent
250:Dissent
237:Stevens
139:Holding
64:04-1067
3084:(1964)
3076:(1963)
3057:(1961)
3049:(1960)
3041:(1952)
3033:(1949)
2987:(1961)
2963:(2022)
2955:(1971)
2925:(1986)
2917:(1976)
2906:review
2893:(2006)
2874:(2016)
2866:(1963)
2847:(1984)
2826:(1988)
2807:(2011)
2799:(2009)
2791:(1984)
2770:(1990)
2749:(1920)
2741:(1914)
2690:(2015)
2682:(2014)
2674:(2007)
2666:(1989)
2658:(1985)
2637:(2015)
2629:(1977)
2610:(2013)
2602:(2005)
2594:(1981)
2575:(2001)
2556:(1983)
2548:(1983)
2540:(1979)
2498:(2008)
2490:(2001)
2482:(1991)
2474:(1983)
2466:(1980)
2458:(1976)
2439:(2012)
2431:(1984)
2423:(1979)
2404:(2015)
2396:(1967)
2388:(1959)
2369:(2006)
2350:(2010)
2342:(2009)
2334:(2002)
2326:(2001)
2318:(1997)
2310:(1995)
2302:(1989)
2294:(1989)
2286:(1987)
2278:(1985)
2259:(2004)
2251:(2000)
2243:(1990)
2222:(2004)
2214:(1985)
2206:(1977)
2198:(1976)
2190:(1975)
2182:(1973)
2161:(1987)
2153:(1976)
2145:(1973)
2126:(1990)
2107:(2019)
2099:(2016)
2091:(2013)
2083:(2013)
2075:(1973)
2067:(1966)
2048:(2014)
2040:(2009)
2032:(2004)
2024:(1998)
2016:(1981)
2008:(1977)
2000:(1973)
1992:(1969)
1984:(1950)
1976:(1948)
1955:(2018)
1947:(1999)
1939:(1999)
1931:(1991)
1923:(1991)
1915:(1985)
1907:(1982)
1899:(1979)
1891:(1970)
1883:(1925)
1862:(1993)
1854:(1990)
1846:(1987)
1838:(1971)
1817:(2014)
1809:(2006)
1801:(1990)
1793:(1974)
1785:(1973)
1777:(1968)
1758:(2021)
1750:(2021)
1742:(2011)
1734:(2006)
1726:(1986)
1718:(1980)
1710:(1977)
1702:(1967)
1658:(1995)
1637:(1978)
1618:(1971)
1599:(1967)
1591:(1906)
1583:(1886)
1562:(2006)
1554:(2006)
1546:(1987)
1538:(1979)
1530:(1978)
1522:(1948)
1488:(2020)
1480:(2014)
1472:(2014)
1464:(2009)
1456:(2004)
1448:(2002)
1440:(2000)
1432:(2000)
1424:(1996)
1416:(1983)
1408:(1983)
1400:(1981)
1392:(1979)
1384:(1979)
1376:(1979)
1368:(1975)
1360:(1968)
1345:frisks
1319:(2018)
1311:(2013)
1303:(2004)
1295:(2003)
1287:(1996)
1279:(1996)
1271:(1983)
1263:(1969)
1255:(1964)
1247:(1949)
1210:(2018)
1202:(1978)
1183:(2021)
1175:(2007)
1167:(2002)
1159:(1992)
1151:(1991)
1143:(1991)
1135:(1984)
1127:(1983)
1119:(1980)
1111:(1968)
1103:(1906)
1095:(1892)
1072:(2018)
1064:(1979)
1056:(1976)
1048:(1971)
1027:(1989)
1019:(1986)
1011:(1986)
992:(1987)
984:(1984)
976:(1924)
939:(2013)
931:(2012)
923:(2005)
915:(2001)
907:(2000)
899:(1990)
891:(1989)
883:(1988)
875:(1984)
867:(1983)
859:(1983)
851:(1967)
843:(1961)
835:(1960)
827:(1928)
819:(1927)
811:(1886)
741:
735:
732:
729:Justia
726:
723:
717:
714:
708:
679:
654:
629:
436:Breyer
337:Canada
269:Thomas
261:Scalia
245:Breyer
211:
209:·
207:
199:
197:·
195:
187:
185:·
183:
175:
173:·
171:
120:S.E.2d
116:Sumter
2971:State
702:
319:
124:cert.
107:Prior
1343:and
704:U.S.
677:ISSN
652:ISSN
627:ISSN
434:and
404:and
321:U.S.
83:more
75:U.S.
73:547
700:547
617:".
317:415
78:103
3108::
1339::
698:,
673:66
671:.
648:42
646:.
623:13
621:.
315:,
114:,
769:e
762:t
755:v
683:.
658:.
633:.
86:)
80:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.