''United States v. Chadwick'', 433 U.S. 1 (1977), was a decision by the

United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point o ...

, which held that, absent

exigency In criminal procedure law of the United States, an exigent circumstance allows law enforcement (under certain circumstances) to enter a structure without a search warrant, or if they have a " knock and announce" warrant, allows them to enter withou ...

, the warrantless search of double-locked luggage just placed in the trunk of a parked vehicle is a violation of the Fourth Amendment and not justified under the

automobile exception The motor vehicle exception is a legal rule in the United States that modifies the normal probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and, when applicable, allows a police officer to search a motor vehicle ...

. The Court reasoned that while luggage is movable like an automobile, it does not have the lesser

expectation of privacy Expectation of privacy is a legal test which is crucial in defining the scope of the applicability of the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is related to, but is not the same as, a ''right to privacy ...

associated with an automobile.. ''Chadwick'' was later abrogated on other grounds by ''

California v. Acevedo ''California v. Acevedo'', 500 U.S. 565 (1991), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court, which interpreted the ''Carroll'' doctrine to provide one rule to govern all automobile searches. The Court stated, "The police may search an automob ...

'' (1991),. in which the Court overruled Chadwick's holding with respect to containers within a vehicle, holding that police may search a container within a vehicle without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe that the container itself holds contraband or evidence. The holding in ''Chadwick'' that a search incident to arrest must not be too remote in time or place is still good law.

Case

Respondents had recently stepped off a train and were putting a suitcase into the trunk of a car when they were stopped by federal agents. Federal agents had probable cause to arrest the respondents and to believe that the suitcase contained narcotics. The respondents were arrested. About an hour and a half after the arrest, the agents opened and searched the suitcase without a warrant.

Holding

In order to search a locked container that is in the exclusive possession of law enforcement officials, those law enforcement officials must get a warrant ( unless an exception applies). In this case, an exception did not apply.

Subsequent Jurisprudence

After ''

'' (1991), this protection no longer applied to people in automobiles because people in automobiles have a diminished expectation of privacy. However, it still applies to people walking on the street.

Applications

*''

People v. Diaz ''People v. Diaz'', 51 Cal. 4th 84, 244 P.3d 501, 119 Cal. Rptr. 3d 105 (Cal. January 3, 2011) was a Supreme Court of California case, which held that police are not required to obtain a warrant to search information contained within a cell phon ...

'', 51 Cal. 4th 84, 244 P.3d 501, 119 Cal. Rptr. 3d 105 (2011)

References

External links