Citation network
United States Vs. Ross
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 01, 1982
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Distinguished
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 798 (1982) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. RossSearch
-
U.S. 798 (1982) United States v. RossSearch
-
to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement established in Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
place even when the container is placed in a vehicle (not otherwise believed to be carrying contraband). United States v. ChadwickSearch
-
d) The doctrine of stare decisis does not preclude rejection here of the holding in Robbins v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U. S. 420 , and some of the reasoning in Arkansas v. SandersSearch
-
joined, post, p. 456 U. S. 827 . JUSTICE STEVENS delivered the opinion of the Court. In Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the conviction. It held that the police had probable cause to stop and search Ross' car and that, under Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
States, supra, and Chambers v. MaroneySearch
-
separately, however, the warrantless search of the two containers found in the trunk. On the basis of Arkansas v. SandersSearch
-
concerning the proper interpretation of Sanders was at least partially responsible for the fact that Robbins v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Id. at 267 U. S. 161 -162 (quoting Director General of Railroads v. KastenbaumSearch
-
an illicit substance. That argument, Page 456 U. S. 810 however, was squarely rejected in United States v. ChadwickSearch
-
United States v. VanSearch
-
The facts in Arkansas v. SandersSearch
-
in the trunk of the taxicab, their duty to obtain a search warrant before opening it is clear under United States v. ChadwickSearch
-
vehicle or anything within it except the footlocker in the former case and the green suitcase in the latter. Robbins v. CaliforniaSearch
-
People v. RobbinsSearch
-
rip the upholstery in their search for concealed whiskey, the search was constitutionally permissible. In Chambers v. MaroneySearch
-
in fact, has sustained warrantless searches of containers found during a lawful search of an automobile. In Husty v. UnitedSearch
-
In Scher v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 267 U. S. 153 (emphasis added). As we noted in Henry v. UnitedSearch
-
a container placed in the trunk of a taxi contains contraband or evidence does not justify a search of the entire cab. v. OurSearch
-
decision today is inconsistent with the disposition in Robbins v. CaliforniaSearch
-
and with the portion of the opinion in Arkansas v. SandersSearch
-
We reaffirm the basic rule of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence stated by Justice Stewart for a unanimous Court in Mincey v. ArizonaSearch
-
Katz v. UnitedSearch
-
containers. See, e.g., United States v. BrownSearch
-
United States v. JimenezSearch
-
the police have probable cause to search an entire vehicle, and not merely an isolated container within it. Cf. State v. BibleSearch
-
State v. HernandezSearch
-
once a vehicle itself has been stopped, the exigency does not necessarily justify a warrantless search. Chambers v. MaroneySearch
-
Texas v. WhiteSearch
-
U.S. at 267 U. S. 162 . Cf. Brinegar v. UnitedSearch
-
Henry v. UnitedSearch
-
See Husty v. UnitedSearch
-
Scher v. UnitedSearch
-
Brinegar v. UnitedSearch
-
Dyke v. TaylorSearch
-
have been upheld in a variety of factual contexts quite different from that presented in Carroll. Cf. Cooper v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
Amos v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial