Research Guides: Student Project: Searches and Seizures of Automobiles: Supreme Court Cases

About

This section of the guide focuses on landmark Supreme Court cases involving searches and seizures of automobiles. These landmark Supreme Court cases have shaped history and have an impact on citizens today. In these landmark Supreme Court cases the Court interpreted who has standing, the scope, and the exceptions.

Plain View Doctrine

Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 (1971)
The Supreme Court held that the police may not rely on the plain view doctrine when conducting a warrantless search of an automobile if the police expected in advance to find evidence and failed to secure a warrant.

Coolidge v. New Hampshire: Oral Arguments
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.

Coolidge v. New Hampshire: Brief for Respondent**
- This link opens in a new window
Coolidge v. New Hampshire: Reply Brief for Petitioner**
- This link opens in a new window

** Requires subscription to Westlaw

Standing

Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (1978)
The Supreme Court held that only a person with a legitimate expectation of privacy in the automobile may have standing to challenge a search or seizure as unconstitutional.

Rakas v. Illinois: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.

Rakas v. Illinois: Brief for Petitioners**
- This link opens in a new window
Rakas v. Illinois: Brief for Respondents**
- This link opens in a new window

** Requires subscription to Westlaw

Probable Cause

Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 (1970)
The Supreme Court held a warrantless search of an automobile is reasonable so long as the police have probable cause.
California v. Carney, 471 U.S. 386 (1985)
The Supreme Court reasoned that an automobile has a reduced expectation of privacy since it is transportable; therefore, an automobile may be searched without a warrant provided probable cause exists.

Chambers v. Maroney: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.
California v. Carney: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.

Chambers v. Maroney: Brief for Respondent**
- This link opens in a new window
Chambers v. Maroney: Brief for the Petitioner**
- This link opens in a new window
California v. Carney: Reply Brief**
- This link opens in a new window
California v. Carney: Respondent's Brief**
- This link opens in a new window

** Requires subscription to Westlaw

Scope

United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982)
The Supreme Court held that police may search closed containers discovered inside a vehicle during a warrantless vehicle search as long as there is probable cause.
California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991)
The Supreme Court held that as long as police have probable cause that a container in an automobile contains contraband, warrantless searches are permitted.

United States v. Ross: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.
California v. Acevedo: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.

United States v. Ross: Brief for the Respondent**
- This link opens in a new window
United States v. Ross: Reply Brief **
- This link opens in a new window
California v. Acevedo: Respondent's Brief**
- This link opens in a new window
California v. Acevedo: Reply Brief**
- This link opens in a new window

** Requires subscription to Westlaw

Incident To Arrest

Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009)
The Supreme Court held that police may search a vehicle of the arrestee only if the arrestee is within reaching distance or if it is reasonable to believe that crime-related evidence will be found in the vehicle.

Arizona v. Gant: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.

Consent

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973)
The Supreme Court held that consent to the search was must have been freely and voluntarily given by looking at the totality of the circumstances.

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte: Brief for Respondent**
- This link opens in a new window
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte: Brief for the Petitioner**
- This link opens in a new window

** Requires subscription to Westlaw

Inventory

South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976)
The Supreme Court held that police may conduct an inventory search of the contents of a vehicle lawfully held in police possession.

South Dakota v. Opperman,: Oral Argument
This section provides audio and the transcript of the oral argument.

South Dakota v. Opperman: Brief of Respondent**
- This link opens in a new window
South Dakota v. Opperman: Brief of Petitioner**
- This link opens in a new window

** Requires subscription to Westlaw