Preview

Arizona vs Grant

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1130 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Arizona vs Grant
Arizona v. Grant

Arizona v. Grant
The U.S. Supreme Court limits how police searches a vehicle after Arizona v. Grant. April 21, 2009 the U.S. Supreme Court adds new limits on how law enforcement officer can search the passenger compartments of a vehicle. Due to this ruling, police officers require having either evidence of a crime for which the suspect is being arrested for, or the officers are completing a weapons check that could be within reach of the suspect. Arizona v. Grant makes important changes within the Fourth Amendment. After New York v. Belton, the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed officers to search the passenger compartment of any vehicle when the person was being arrested that was driving or was a passenger in without a warrant. Belton’s justification was the fact that a person can constitutionally be search for weapons and any other evidence, and further that any officer can search the immediate area of control for weapons or any other evidence. Since the new ruling with Arizona v. Grant overturns the ruling of New York v. Belton, and sets a new standard for what is allowed during a search in a car related arrested.
New Ruling
The new ruling in Arizona v. grant adds modifications to the Fourth Amendment in regards to police searches. The changes state, “Police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to 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” (Arizona v. Grant 07-542.) The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the fact that officers can justify search a vehicle in traffic violations or any situation where no other evidence of crime had occurred. Example of those would be: failure to appear, driving without a license, failing to pay child support. Arizona v. Grant allows checking for weapons within reach of the suspect, or anywhere reasonable within reach of the suspect.



References: Commonwealth v. Cass, 709 A.2d 350, 357 (Pa. 1998) Kathy Davis, John Kelsey, Dia Langellier, Misty Mapes, and Jeff Rosendahl Surveillance in Schools: Safety vs. Personal Privacy Locker Searches students.ed.uiuc.edu/jkelsey/surveillance/locker.htm http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/highlights.htm U.S. V. Davis 482 F.2d 893,908

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In 2002, Lemon Montrea Johnson was the passenger in the backseat of a car stopped for a traffic violation. Johnson was charged with; inter alia, possession of drugs and possession of a weapon by a felon. These items were discovered during a protective pat-down search of Johnson. Johnson was convicted by the trial court. Johnson argued that his conviction should be overturned because the trial court was in error by denying his motion to suppress the evidence. He argued that he had been unlawfully “seized” because being a passenger in a vehicle does not automatically constitute “seizure.” He furthered argued that even if he had been “seized,” that by the time Officer Trevizo searched him he was no longer “seized” as their conversation had become consensual. Furthermore, the evidence should not be considered because the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights and because the…

    • 4995 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Arizona v. Gant (2009) SCOTUS rule held that the Belton rule was revised as the justices stated that it did not give authority for the police officers to search an arrestee’s vehicle if the occupant had been arrested and therefore could not access the interior of the car. This implies that the police should only search the arrestee and places that could be reached. Gant could no longer reach the interior of his car, and there was no reasonable ground to suppose that a search would produce evidence to support the offense of driving on a suspended license. Gant v. Arizona established that a search of a vehicle after an arrest is permissible when the arrestee is not confined, and the passenger compartment is within their immediate reach.…

    • 296 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    e. Court of Appeals found the search to be unconstitutional, concluding that after the occupants were arrested the vehicle and its contents were "safely within the exclusive custody and control of the police."…

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Essay Arizona vs. Grant

    • 356 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The case Arizona vs. Grant occured because an event that happened on August 25, 1999 involving two police officers, and a suspect who was believed to be involved in narcotics activity. The officers first visit to the house where the suspect lived was followed by a second visit later that night because he wasnt there at the initial visit. After their first visit they ran a background check and found causes for the arrest of the subject, Rodney Grant. Upon the second return the subject Rodney Grant was apprehended after pulling into his driveway and walking about ten feet towards the officers. After they placed him in the police vehicle, they searched the suspects car, which was the cause of the Arizona vs Grant case, because of a debate on evidence pulled from the car without reasonable reasons to search it. Although there was cocaine and a weapons in the car, the officers didnt have reasons to prove why the searched it after the suspect had already been apprehended and put into the police vehicle. It is because of this that led to questioning of why the car was searched because Grant was not in the nearby vicinity of the vehicle and therefore no harm to the officers unless he had a weapons in his immediate possession.…

    • 356 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The issue here is whether a search for weapons without probable cause for an arrest is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment to the United States. Through the trial the court rejected the prosecution theory that he gun was seized during a lawful…

    • 966 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The issue brought into question in the Terry vs. Ohio case in 1968 involved a police officer, McFadden, who was patrolling the area in normal clothes. He came across two men pacing the area suspiciously and glancing into a store. He the watched them meet at a street corner frequently where they were joined by another man. After watching them do this approximately twenty-four times he approached the group and asked them their names. He patted down the overcoat that the man was wearing and felt a revolver, which he then removed. The defense argued the issue to be admissibility of evidence uncovered by an improper search and seizure. They argued that the Fourth Amendment protects the people despite where they are; at home or on the streets. It…

    • 406 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Lago Vista Case

    • 635 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Atwater v City of Lago Vista (2001) was a case concerning the fourth amendment. This case was where the defendant Atwater was arrested for a seat belt violation. O’Connor wrote the dissent that the arrest was unreasonable. O’Connor stated “…pointless indignity’ that served no discernible state interest and yet holds that her arrest was constitutionally permissible (Electronic Privacy Information Center, 2005).” She implies that if an officer believes someone committed a crime in their presence they can arrest the accused person. This in O’Connor’s opinion presents an issue with the precedence it sets. To her it seems that police officers can use this to explore options that would be otherwise not permitted without an arrest.…

    • 635 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Arizona v. Gant

    • 995 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Respondent, Rodney Gant, was arrested for driving with a suspended license. Subsequent to the search of the Gant’s vehicle officers found cocaine in the back seat. At trial Gant moved to have the evidence suppressed denied that there was probable cause to search the vehicle, but did not decide to suppress the evidence. The court ruled the search to be that incident to an arrest. Respondent was found guilty and sentenced to three-year prison term.…

    • 995 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Wyoming V. Shatzer

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages

    FACTS: After a routine traffic stop, a police officer noticed a hypodermic syringe in the shirt pocket of the car’s driver, which the driver soon admitted was for using drugs. The officer searched the passenger compartment for contraband and came upon a purse, which the respondent, a passenger in the car, claimed was hers. There was drug paraphernalia inside, and the respondent was arrested on drug charges. The evidence was admitted at trial and respondent was convicted. The Wyoming Supreme Court then reversed, holding that an officer with probable cause to search a vehicle may search all containers that might conceal the object of the search, but if the officer knows or should know that the container belongs to a passenger who is not suspected of criminal activity, then the container is not allowed to be searched under the Fourth Amendment unless someone had the opportunity to conceal contraband. The State of Wyoming was then granted certiorari.…

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Other conditions on the searches incident to arrest exception include the use of force, the search of other individuals with the arrested individual, searching the vehicle of an arrest person, contemporaneousness and inventory searches "if a government agent has probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime without a warrant" because "in the time it would take to get a warrant, the car, driver and contraband or evidence could be long gone" (Harr, Hess, 2006. p. 231). The 1981 case of Robbins v. California saw the justifications for searching without a warrant. Those specifications include that the mobility of vehicles produce exigent circumstances.…

    • 310 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The discovery and search are procedures affirmed by cases New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454, (1981), Arizona v. Gant, 566 U.S. 332, (2009) and Wyoming v. Houghton, 526 U.S. 295, (1999). In the case of New York v. Belton, the court ruled that officers can search a car and any compartments in the car after conducting an arrest. This allows the search of the vehicle in the case of Rounds, because he was in custody in the patrol car, and he was arrested. Arizona v. Gant held that the search of a vehicle, after its occupant is arrested, is permissible if it is reasonable to believe that there is evidence linked to the arrest. Since Officer Towns first arrested and placed Rounds in the patrol car and then moved to question the opaque bag, he was in his right, especially because there was reason to believe that the contents of the bag could be linked to evidence of Rounds’s past crime: possession of marijuana. The prosecution cites Wyoming v. Houghton as well. This case dictates that as long as there is probable cause to search a vehicle, all following searches, including those of its contents are legal. Since there was probable cause to search Rounds’s vehicle, the recovery and seizure of the opaque bag was constitutional.…

    • 1222 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Terry v. Ohio was a court decision made in 1968 that still affects how police conduct their operations to this day. This case gave special liberties to police officers which would otherwise be in conflict with the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment states " the right of the people to be secure in their persons, house, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized. " The Supreme Court's decision allowing reasonable suspicion of a crime can be grounds for a search, even without probable cause.…

    • 914 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Weeks Vs United States

    • 302 Words
    • 2 Pages

     Practical: Arguments  Weeks’ view: The 4th Amendment states that people are safe from unreasonable and searches without a warranty. And any evidence obtained from illegal an search is illegal. Federal officials should not be able to break the law in order to enforce the law.  United States’ view: An arrest was made in connection with a search, and further searches produced further evidence of illegal activity.…

    • 302 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mapp v Ohio

    • 434 Words
    • 2 Pages

    iii. For Mapp, the police, who possessed no warrant to search her property, had acted improperly. Any evidence found during the search should have been thrown out of court and her conviction overturned. For the state of Ohio, even if the search was made improperly, the State was not prevented from using the evidence seized because “the Fourteenth Amendment does not forbid the admission of evidence obtained by an unreasonable search and seizure.” Ohio argued that the 14th Amendment does not guarantee 4th Amendment protections in the State courts.…

    • 434 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    I honestly believe that the officer was on legal grounds to search anywhere in the vehicle because he was given the consent to search by…

    • 602 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays