Citation network
Arizona Vs. Gant
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 21, 2009
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
- Relied / Followed
-
Syllabus October Term, 2008 Arizona V. GantSearch
-
the evidence, and he was convicted of drug offenses. Reversing, the State Supreme Court distinguished New York v. BeltonSearch
-
did not answer the question whether officers may conduct such a search once the scene has been secured. Because Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Katz v. UnitedSearch
-
Thornton v. UnitedSearch
-
s car. Cf. Knowles v. IowaSearch
-
s other Fourth Amendment decisions, e.g. , Michigan v. LongSearch
-
U. S. 103 , and United States v. RossSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
E. Arizona v. GantSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Arizona V. GantSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 07-542 Arizona, Petitioner V. RodneySearch
-
s warrant requirement, as defined in Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U. S. 752 (1969), and applied to vehicle searches in New York v. BeltonSearch
-
the arrestee has been secured and cannot access the interior of the vehicle. Consistent with the holding in Thornton v. UnitedSearch
-
footnote omitted). Among the exceptions to the warrant requirement is a search incident to a lawful arrest. See Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
in officer safety and evidence preservation that are typically implicated in arrest situations. See United States v. RobinsonSearch
-
for the search-incident-to-arrest exception are absent and the rule does not apply. E.g. , Preston v. UnitedSearch
-
State v. BeltonSearch
-
Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae in New York v. BeltonSearch
-
there will be no reasonable basis to believe the vehicle contains relevant evidence. See, e.g. , Atwater v. LagoSearch
-
s privacy interest in his vehicle is less substantial than in his home, see New York v. ClassSearch
-
a vehicle search under additional circumstances when safety or evidentiary concerns demand. For instance, Michigan v. LongSearch
-
Id. , at 1049 (citing Terry v. OhioSearch
-
If there is probable cause to believe a vehicle contains evidence of criminal activity, United States v. RossSearch
-
there may be still other circumstances in which safety or evidentiary interests would justify a search. Cf. Maryland v. BuieSearch
-
to its persistence. Cf. Mincey v. ArizonaSearch
-
s reference in this regard to the reliance interests cited in Dickerson v. UnitedSearch
-
arrest exception. Police authority to search the place in which a lawful arrest is made was broadly asserted in Marron v. UnitedSearch
-
States , 275 U. S. 192 (1927), and limited a few years later in Go-Bart Importing Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
States , 282 U. S. 344 (1931), and United States v. LefkowitzSearch
-
S. 452 (1932). The limiting views expressed in Go-Bart and Lefokwitz were in turn abandoned in Harris v. UnitedSearch
-
s arrest. Only a year later the Court in Trupiano v. UnitedSearch
-
And just two years after that, in United States v. RabinowitzSearch
-
was unable to handcuff the occupants because he had only one set of handcuffs. See Brief for Petitioner in New York v. BeltonSearch
-
Footnote 2 Compare United States v. GreenSearch
-
and lying facedown on the ground surrounded by four police officers 6-to-10 feet from the vehicle), United States v. EdwardsSearch
-
unauthorized a vehicle search conducted while the arrestee was handcuffed in the back of a patrol car), United States v. VaseySearch
-
an arrest and after the arrestee had been handcuffed and secured in the back of a police car), with United States v. HraskySearch
-
United States v. WeaverSearch
-
after an arrest and after the arrestee had been handcuffed and secured in the back of a patrol car), and United States v. WhiteSearch
-
and secured in a patrol car has not abated since we decided Thornton . See, e.g. , United States v. MurphySearch
-
United States v. WilliamsSearch
-
United States v. DorseySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial