Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-157_8mjp.pdf
Page Number: 3

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that 
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 20–157 
_________________ 

EDWARD A. CANIGLIA, PETITIONER v. 
ROBERT F. STROM, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT 

[May 17, 2021] 

JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. 
Decades ago, this Court held that a warrantless search of 
an impounded vehicle for an unsecured firearm did not vio-
late  the  Fourth  Amendment.    Cady  v.  Dombrowski,  413 
U. S. 433 (1973).  In reaching this conclusion, the Court ob-
served that police officers who patrol the “public highways”
are often called to discharge noncriminal “community care-
taking functions,” such as responding to disabled vehicles
or investigating accidents.  Id., at 441.  The question today 
is  whether  Cady’s  acknowledgment  of  these  “caretaking”
duties creates a standalone doctrine that justifies warrant-
less searches and seizures in the home.  It does not. 

I 
During an argument with his wife at their Rhode Island
home,  Edward  Caniglia  (petitioner)  retrieved  a  handgun 
from  the  bedroom,  put  it  on  the  dining  room  table,  and
asked his wife to “shoot [him] now and get it over with.”  She 
declined, and instead left to spend the night at a hotel.  The 
next  morning,  when  petitioner’s  wife  discovered  that  she
could not reach him by telephone, she called the police (re-
spondents) to request a welfare check.