Document: 449 U.S. 1 101 S.Ct. 42 66 L.Ed.2d State of COLORADOv.Peter Rodney BANNISTER. No. 79-1901. Oct. 20, 1980. PER CURIAM. In the early morning October 15, 1979, an officer Colorado Springs Police Department observed a blue 1967 Pontiac GTO automobile moving along road at speed above legal limit. Before could pursue vehicle, it disappeared from his sight. Shortly thereafter, heard police radio dispatch reporting that theft motor vehicle parts had occurred in area he was patrolling car. The announced number chrome lug nuts were among items stolen, and provided description two suspects. A few minutes after hearing report, spotted same seen earlier, still speeding. He saw car enter service station, followed there for purpose issuing traffic citation to its driver. 2 As approached car, both occupants, including respondent, stepped out it. conversation between respondent ensued, just outside closed front door automobile. At this time, open glove compartment located vehicle's bucket seats, as well wrenches on floorboard back seat. These plain view, illuminated by lights station. Recognizing companion met those suspected stealing parts, immediately arrested them. then seized wrenches. 3 date scheduled trial charges moved suppress arresting seized. court granted motion, decision affirmed Supreme Court Colorado.1 subsequently filed petition certiorari Court. 4 provisions Fourth Amendment are enforceable against States through Fourteenth, is axiomatic "searches conducted judicial process, without prior approval judge or magistrate, per se unreasonable under Amendment-subject only specifically established delineated exceptions." Katz v. United States, 389 347, 357, 88 507, 514, 19 576 (1967). One these exceptions, recognized least since Carroll 267 132, 45 280, 69 L.Ed. 543 (1925), exists when other stopped have probable cause believe contains evidence crime. See Arkansas Sanders, 442 753, 760, 99 2586, 2591, 61 235 (1979). upheld legality search stopped. Since Carroll, warrantless searches been found permissible even searched being Texas White, 423 67, 96 304, 46 209 (1975); Chambers Maroney, 399 42, 90 1975, 26 419 (1970). each latter cases, constitutionally because immediate, on-the-scene would permissible. supra, U.S., S.Ct., 305; 52, 1981. 5 issue present case seizure scene shortly speeding Thus, if "that contents offend law," 159, 287 permissible.2 6 Probable self-evident. Indeed, acknowledged cause, but mistakenly concluded warrant required seize within. 7 not stop first time detected speeding, accosted next opportunity, entered His subsequent approach side order driver entirely legitimate.3 Standing happened see matching some recently stolen vicinity, occupants circumstances arrest, also Chambers, incriminating warrant.4 8 respondent's motion leave proceed forma pauperis granted, judgment set aside, remanded proceedings inconsistent with opinion. 9 It so ordered. (Colo.) 607 P.2d 987. Another factor contributes justification absence such situation "the furnish particular auto articles most often unforeseeable." 50-51, Cardwell Lewis, 417 583, 595, 94 2464, 2471, 41 325 (1974). This applies force case. reason wholly unconnected seizure, be especially require detour magistrate before unanticipated lawfully There can no question stopping detention constitute "seizure" within meaning Amendment. Delaware Prouse, 440 648, 653 (1979); Martinez-Fuerte, 428 543, 556-558, 3074, 3082-3083, 49 1116 (1976); Brignoni-Ponce, 422 873, 878, 95 2574, 2578, (1975). does dispute nor they view spoke him beside whatsoever officer's presence pretext confirm any previous suspicion about occupants.

Category: 0