Document: 376 U.S. 364 84 S.Ct. 881 11 L.Ed.2d 777 John Brenton PRESTON, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 163. Argued Feb. 25, 1964. Decided March 23, Francis M. Shea, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Sidney Glazer, respondent. Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner and three others were convicted in United States District Court Eastern Kentucky on a charge conspiracy to rob federally insured bank violation 18 U.S.C. § 2113, conviction having been based largely evidence obtained by search motorcar. The Appeals Sixth Circuit affirmed, rejecting contentions, timely made trial appellate courts, that both original arrest, vagrancy, subsequent seizure had violated Fourth Amendment. 305 F.2d 172. We granted certiorari. 373 931, 83 1541, 10 689. In view we take case, need not decide whether arrest was valid, since hold not. 2 police Newport, Kentucky, received telephone complaint at 3 o'clock one morning 'three suspicious men acting suspiciously' seated motorcar parked business district evening before. Four policemen straightaway went place where car found petitioner two companions. officers asked why they there, but gave answers which testified unsatisfactory evasive. All admitted unemployed; all them together only 25 cents. One said he bought day before (which later turned out be true), could produce any title. They their reason being there meet truck driver who would pass through Newport night, identify company worked for, say what his looked like, did know time arrive. arrested searched weapons, took headquarters. car, driven an officer station, from it towed garage. Soon after booked some garage loaded revolvers glove compartment. unable open trunk returned detective told go back try get into trunk. so, able enter seat caps, women's stockings (one with mouth eye holes), rope, pillow slips, illegally manufactured license plate equipped snapped over another plate, other items. After petitioner's companions confessed others—he name petitioner—intended Berry, town about 51 miles Newport. At this, called Federal Bureau Investigation case articles car. It use these articles, objections, raised Amendment question here consider. provides: 'The right people secure persons, houses, papers, effects, against unreasonable searches seizures, shall violated, no Warrants issue, upon probable cause, supported Oath or affirmation, particularly describing searched, persons things seized.' 4 state used defendant federal is judged as if officers. Elkins v. States, 206, 80 1437, 1669 (1960). Our cases make clear motorcars must test reasonableness under result such admissible. E.g., Carroll 267 132, 45 280, 69 L.Ed. 543 (1925); Brinegar 338 160, 1302, 93 1879 (1949). Common sense dictates, course, questions involving readily moved cannot treated identical arising fixed structures like houses. For this reason, may house reasonable See supra, U.S., 153, 285, 543. But even motorcars, still is, unreasonable. Therefore inquire facts are fall within exceptions constitutional rule warrant made. 5 argued justified incidental lawful arrest. Unquestionably, when person lawfully arrested, have right, without warrant, contemporaneous accused weapons fruits implements commit crime. Weeks 232 383, 392, 34 341, 344, 58 652 (1914); Agnello 269 20, 30, 46 4, 5, 70 145 (1925). This seize extends accused's immediate control, 158, 287, 543, and, extent depending circumstances 145; Marron 275 192, 199, 48 74, 77, 72 231 (1927); Rabinowitz, 339 56, 61—62, 430, 433, 94 653 (1950). allowing justified, example, might assault effect escape, well prevent destruction crime easily happen weapon control. justifications absent remote Once custody, then place, simply incident 31, 145. Here, assume, Government urges, that, either because arrests valid cause think stolen, first came scene. does place. Stoner California, 483, 889. undertaken until taken custody station point danger destroyed crime—assuming can 'fruits' 'implements' vagrancy. Cf. Jeffers, 342 48, 51—52, 93, 95, 96 59 (1951). Nor, garage, locality jurisdiction. too conclude, therefore, failed Amendment, rendering inadmissible. 6 Reversed remanded.

Category: 0