Document: 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009) ARIZONA, Petitioner, v. Rodney Joseph GANT. No. 07-542. Supreme Court of United States. Argued October 7, 2008. Decided April 21, 2009. *1713 STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion Court, in which SCALIA, SOUTER, THOMAS, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined. filed a concurring opinion. BREYER, dissenting *1714 ALITO, opinion, ROBERTS, C.J., KENNEDY, joined, joined except as to Part II-E. T. Maziarz, for petitioner. Anthony Yang, States amicus curiae, by special leave supporting Thomas F. Jacobs, respondent. Terry Goddard, Attorney General, Mary R. O'Grady, Solicitor Kent E. Cattani, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals/Capital Litigation Section, Assistant Counsel Record, Phoenix, Arizona, Jeffrey Green, Isaac Adams, Sidley Austin LLP, Washington, DC, Tucson, AZ, Randall M. Howe, Appeals Nicholas D. Acedo, Attorneys Justice STEVENS Court. After Gant was arrested driving with suspended license, handcuffed, locked back patrol car, police officers searched his car discovered cocaine pocket jacket on backseat. Because could not have accessed retrieve weapons or evidence at time search, Arizona held that search-incident-to-arrest exception Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement, defined Chimel California, 395 U.S. 752, 89 2034, 23 L. Ed. 2d 685 (1969), applied vehicle searches New York Belton, 453 454, 101 2860, 69 768 (1981), did justify search this case. We agree conclusion. Under Chimel, may incident arrest only space within an arrestee's "`immediate control,'" meaning "the area from he might gain possession weapon destructible evidence." U.S., 763, 2034. The safety evidentiary justifications underlying Chimel's reaching-distance rule determine Belton's scope. Accordingly, we hold Belton does authorize recent occupant's after arrestee has been secured cannot access interior vehicle. Consistent holding Thornton States, 541 615, 124 2127, 158 905 (2004), following suggestion SCALIA's judgment case, id., 632, also conclude circumstances unique automobile context when it is reasonable believe offense be found I On August 25, 1999, acting anonymous tip residence 2524 North Walnut Avenue being used sell drugs, Tucson Griffith Reed knocked front door asked speak owner. answered and, identifying himself, stated *1715 expected owner return later. left conducted records check, revealed Gant's driver's license had there outstanding license. When returned house evening, they man near woman parked it. third officer arrived, providing false name possessing drug paraphernalia. Both arrestees were handcuffed separate cars arrived. recognized entered driveway, Officer confirmed driver shining flashlight into drove him. end got out shut door. Griffith, who about 30 feet away, called Gant, approached each other, meeting 10-to-12 car. immediately other scene, backup. two more backseat their placed car: One them gun, bag charged offenses narcotic sale paraphernalia (i.e., plastic found). He moved suppress seized ground warrantless violated Amendment. Among things, argued because posed no threat traffic suppression hearing why conducted, responded: "Because law says can do it." App. 75. trial court rejected State's contention probable cause contraband began, 18, 30, but denied motion suppress. Relying fact saw commit crime without apprehended him shortly exited permissible arrest. Id., 37. A jury guilty both counts, sentenced 3-year term imprisonment. protracted state-court proceedings, concluded unreasonable court's discussed length our decision passenger compartment any containers therein contemporaneous vehicle's occupant. 216 Ariz. 1, 3-4, 162 P.3d 640, 642-643 (2007) (citing 460, 2860). distinguished case concerning scope answer threshold question whether conduct all once scene secure." Ariz., 4, P.3d, 643. earlier observed requirement justified *1716 interests preservation. longer exist secure under supervision officer," concluded, "warrantless necessary protect prevent destruction 5, 644. unreasonable. justices would upheld based view validity ... clearly depend presence rationales particular case." 8, 647. Although disagreed majority's acknowledged "[t]he bright-line embraced long criticized probably merits reconsideration." 10, 649. They thus "add[ed their] voice[s] others urged revisit Belton." 11, 163 650. chorus us includes courts, scholars, Members questioned decision's clarity its fidelity Amendment principles. therefore granted petition certiorari. 552 ___, 128 1443, 170 274 (2008). II precedent, analysis begins, should every addressing reasonableness basic "searches outside judicial process, prior approval judge magistrate, are per se Amendmentsubject few specifically established well-delineated exceptions." Katz 389 347, 357, 88 507, 19 576 (1967) (footnote omitted). exceptions lawful See Weeks 232 383, 392, 34 341, 58 652 (1914). derives preservation typically implicated situations. Robinson, 414 218, 230-234, 94 467, 38 427 (1973); In include person `within immediate control'construing phrase mean Ibid. That limitation, continues define boundaries exception, ensures commensurate purposes protecting arresting safeguarding conceal destroy. ibid. (noting "in order remove [the arrestee] seek use" [the] concealment destruction" (emphasis added)). If possibility reach enforcement absent apply. E.g., Preston 376 364, 367-368, 84 881, 11 777 (1964). considered application context. lone *1717 stopped speeding one four occupants. While asking registration, smelled burnt marijuana envelope floor marked "Supergold"a associated marijuana. Thus having occupants committed offense, ordered vehicle, arrest, patted down. Without handcuffing arrestees,[1] "`split up areas Thruway so physical touching other'" including backseat, cocaine. 456, 2860. unconstitutional, concluding contents "safely exclusive custody control police." State 50 N.Y.2d 447, 452, 429 N.Y.S.2d 574, 407 N.E.2d 420, 423 (1980). consider permits "a inside while automobile's occupants, standing unsecured around vehicle." Brief 80-328, p. i. certiorari "courts ha[d] workable definition `the arrestee' arguably automobile." brief, erred officer's control. Focusing number proximity asserted contents, making Chimel. 7-8. curiae support State, permissive standard, maintained must "`substantially contemporaneous'" arresta deemed "satisfied if occurs during period consummated before situation stabilized said completed." Amicus Curiae O.T.1980, 14. There parties amici authorizes realistic considering these arguments, lawfully arrests occupant automobile, may, automobile" therein. 2860 large part assumption "that articles relatively narrow compass generally, even inevitably, reach.'" read merely delineating proper *1718 459, is, reaching distance, supplies generalization entire reached. state search. It now urges adopt reading followed III Despite textual Court's widely understood allow This attributable Brennan's dissent characterized resting "fiction always recently car." 466, approach, argued, result presumably same officer] companions car" conducting 468, Since decided Courts given different answers arrest,[2] predominated. As O'Connor observed, "lower decisions seem treat ability entitlement rather than twin Chimel." Thornton, 624, 2127 (opinion part). SCALIA similarly noted that, although improbable stored cases allowing "this precise factual scenario legion." 628, judgment) (collecting cases).[3] Indeed, *1719 some courts "even already scene." (same). broad authorized notwithstanding most will To authorizing untether exceptiona incompatible statement way alters fundamental principles regarding custodial arrests." n. 3, reject rationale distance search.[4] follow "reasonable relevant (SCALIA, judgment). many cases, violation, basis contains evidence. See, e.g., Atwater Lago Vista, 532 318, 324, 121 1536, 149 549 (2001); Knowles Iowa, 525 113, 118, 119 484, 142 492 (1998). But others, supply searching Neither nor likelihood discovering offense-related Unlike involved single confronted arrestees, five outnumbered three whom those circumstances, An lacking Whereas offenses, license expect find Cf. Knowles, 484. reasonably believed either therein, *1720 IV seriously disagree conclusion nevertheless asks uphold above. argues regardless expansive correctly balances interests, interest rule, limited privacy For several reasons, argument. First, undervalues stake. motorist's less substantial home, see Class, 475 106, 112-113, 106 960, 81 (1986), former important deserving constitutional protection, 117, particularly significant just purse, briefcase, container space. gives power such whenever individual caught committing believing creates serious recurring countless individuals. character implicates central concern Amendmentthe giving unbridled discretion rummage among person's private effects.[5] At concerns, exaggerates provides. expansively odds how close proximate first contact bring encounter purview[6] commences *1721 removed scene.[7] generated great deal uncertainty, touted "bright line." 3 LaFave, § 7.1(c), 514-524. Contrary suggestion, unnecessary interests. view, permit Other additional concerns demand. instance, Michigan Long, 463 1032, 103 3469, 77 1201 (1983), suspicion individual, arrestee, "dangerous" "gain weapons." 1049, 3469 Ohio, 392 1868, 20 889 (1968)). criminal activity, Ross, 456 798, 820-821, 102 2157, 72 572 (1982), found. permitted today Amendment, Ross allows offenses broader. Finally, still Maryland Buie, 494 325, 334, 110 1093, 108 276 (1990) (holding protective sweep suspects dangerous hiding). These together ensure genuine encountered Construing broadly serve purpose provide entitlement, anathema basis. unpersuaded arguments meaningfully further intrusion individuals' privacy.[8] *1722 V Our colleagues argue doctrine stare decisis requires adherence though absent.[9] course "essential respect accorded judgments stability law," compel past withstands "careful analysis." Lawrence Texas, 539 558, 577, 123 2472, 156 508 (2003). never relied continuance unconstitutional practice. And loath easily supported simply present hard imagine factually distinct, suspected involves securely detained distinguishable petitioner offense. unsurprising concurred concur case.[10] ALITO's (hereinafter dissent) consideration reliance result. appears taught academies 28 years,[11] reasons exception. Countless individuals nothing violation right *1723 security effects community version establish sort outweigh countervailing share rights fully protected. clear practice unlawful, discontinuance outweighs "entitlement" persistence. Mincey 437 385, 393, 98 2408, 57 290 (1978) ("[T]he mere made efficient itself disregard Amendment"). dissent's reference regard cited Dickerson 530 428, 120 2326, 147 405 (2000), misplaced. post, 1728. observing "Miranda become embedded routine point where warnings national culture," 443, referring requiring broader societal right. ignores checkered history Police authority place Marron 275 192, 48 74, 231 (1927), years later Go-Bart Importing Co. 282 344, 51 153, 75 374 (1931), Lefkowitz, 285 52 76 877 (1932). limiting views expressed Lefkowitz turn abandoned Harris 331 145, 67 1098, 91 1399 (1947), four-room apartment Only year Trupiano 334 699, 708, 68 1229, 92 1663 (1948), retreated holding, noting strictly limited" "something necessity arrest." Rabinowitz, 339 56, 70 430, 653 (1950), again reversed apartment. overruled Rabinowitz what remained Notably, none dissenters preceded outweighed unjustifiable rule. experience since shown underpinning unfounded. know rarely "within reach,'" blind faulty myriad searches. require approve violations. VI absent, *1724 unless obtain show another applies. affirmed. ordered. concurring. "unreasonable" look historical practices Framers sought preserve; inadequate guidance, apply traditional standards reasonableness. Virginia Moore, 553 1598, 1602-04, 559 officers' vehicles uncertain, 629-631, (2004) judgment), govern. abundantly take set forth Thornton: themselves hidden weapons. connection roadside stop, virtually intrusive effective means ensuring safetyand employed: ordering away patting down open, him, placing squad Law face risk shot pull over. height initial confrontation; reduced government failed instance formerly restrained escaped own 626, 2127; remedied deficiency borne mind speaking here automatically permitting arrested. Where made, suspect (1983). no-arrest exists, allowed interrogation completed. Long issue here. acknowledges officer-safety asserts adopted. (As described above, differently). retain car-search future believes past: stop "arrestee search." Ante, 1723. standard fails needed guidance leaves much room manipulation, inviting *1725 (at least involved) my abandon Belton-Thornton charade overrule cases. ipso facto "reasonable" object occurred. respondent (a vehicle), unlawful. ALITO insists demand good reason abandoning precedent. true enough, seems me ample precedent badly reasoned produces erroneous (in unconstitutional) results. Payne Tennessee, 501 808, 827, 111 2597, 115 720 (1991). recognize fanciful upon was: [evidence-gathering] supra, 631, judgment; citations automobile-arrest search's Post, 1731 (dissenting opinion). disagree. formulation preserves outcomes tethers triggering event. contrast, precisely exigency-based applicable: makes exigency grounds reasonable, more. conclusory assertion difficult administer practice, 1729; ease suggest otherwise. No Justice, however, shares entirely abandoned. unacceptable come 4-to-1-to-4 governing uncertain. am choice leaving current understanding effect, acceding artificial narrowing adopted STEVENS. latter, said, degree certainty think desirable field; opens field plainly searches greater evil. join dissenting. best setting occupantregardless danger poses. produce results divorced rationale. Compare 764, (1969) (explaining need harm crime). *1726 better rulewere impression. matter, impression, difference. numerous courts. Principles apply, wish change well-established legal precedentwhere, here, considerable questionbear heavy burden. Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. PSKS, Inc., 551 877, 127 2705, 2719-21, 168 623 (BREYER, dissenting). burden met. Nor considerations ordinarily determining satisfied. consequently THE CHIEF JUSTICE KENNEDY join, BREYER joins II-E, Twenty-eight ago, "when policeman (Footnote omitted.) Five (2004)a involving materially herethe reaffirmed extended applicable Today's effectively overrules decisions, so. precedents, adopts new two-part (1) (2) 1723-1724. endanger truly endorsed Justices; solely avoiding "4-to-1-to 4 opinion." 1725 (concurring second taken independent explanation origin justification certain confuse judges come. gathered carried good-faith well-settled law, purports base landmark reasoning undermines respectfully dissent. refuses acknowledge overruling doubt handcuff them. 2860; Petitioner 3. then *1727 car's seat drugs. 455, By divided vote, 420 gained majority thought done so, 2, N.E.2d, 423, real possibility. 453, 424 Gabrielli, J.). Viewing disagreement illustrative persistent problem, "`[a] familiar standard'" "`essential guide officers'" make arrests. 458, (quoting Dunaway York, 442 200, 213-214, 99 2248, 60 824 (1979)). reach, "[i]n category requires," categorically clearer. unequivocally: "[W]e explicit statement, curiously suggests adopting narrower explicitly namely, distance." 1717-1718 original). According wide acceptance "may dissent." 1718. mischaracterize misinterpreted. noted, held. holding. 620, 2127. So 625, ("In [Belton] whole [passenger] case"). ante, 1724 (Belton "arresting weapons"). "bright-line rule" interred. substantially explain departure usual justified. "inexorable command," 828, L.Ed.2d *1728 (1991), applies rigidly Glidden Zdanok, 370 530, 543, 82 1459, 8 671 (1962) (plurality "`special justification'" abandonment. (2000). Relevant factors identified engendered reliance, 442, world, Sorrell, 548 230, 244, 126 2479, 165 482 (2006) opinion); Burnet Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 412, 815 (1932) (Brandeis, dissenting), proved unworkable, Vieth Jubelirer, 267, 306, 1769, 546 opinion) Payne, 2597), undermined see, Patterson McLean Credit Union, 491 164, 173-174, 109 2363, 105 132 (1989), reasoned. Vieth, 1769 weigh favor retaining Belton. Reliance. "cases property contract rights," entitled weight. Dickerson, "weigh[ed]" heavily against Miranda 384 436, 86 1602, 16 694 (1966), "embedded practice." 2326. certainly quarter century. Many searchesalmost figure appealwere scrupulous likely very day announced, faith recognizes "Belton years." 1722-1723. seemingly counts nothing. states "[w]e practice," 1722, routinely relies sustaining constitutionality doing heresua sponte overruled. cites proposition disregarded provides lesser protection challenged sustained errs arguing weight "police right." "societal reliance," contended because, *1729 "[f]or nearly thirty-five years, Miranda's requirements shaped training [and] conduct." O.T.1999, 99-5525, 33. B Changed circumstances. Abandonment dangers surrounding ago. claims reach,"'" 1723-1724, surely well known 1981 unlikely destroy C Workability. unworkable. contrary, express test easy notes perfectly Specifically, sometimes debatable 1716-1718, problem small comparison problems produce. rule searchreintroduces case-by-case, fact-specific decisionmaking avoid. illustrated, unclear Even What variety situations unclear. D Consistency subsequent ago Thornton. E Bad reasoning. harshly critical reasoning, perceives represented modestand quite defensibleextension understand decision. Prior precedents "possession" "control" gathering 759-760, Based "abstract doctrine," 760, far beyond grabbing area. (1950) (search office); (1947) apartment). *1730 written Stewart, Concluding arrestofficer evidencethe confined person" 762-763, Unfortunately, say [an evidence" measured meant specialty unusual intended hardly appreciate facts. able 1719, (stating rare case" search). Second, safer searching, (And appears, surprisingly, prevailing practice.[1]) Thus, assessed, play. Moreover, applicability turned chooses securing later, "create perverse incentive prolong kept pose officer." Abdul-Saboor, 85 F.3d 664, 669 (C.A.D.C.1996). D.C. Circuit be, Mr. Bumble `a ass.'" Tejada, 524 809, 812 (C.A.7 2008) ("[I]f defendant's radius moment legitimate complaint if, put radius"). intended. Handcuffs use 1969. searchand soare facts attention. conducted. proceeded interpretation Again through "generally, inevitably" reach. undoubtedly seated handcuffs. *1731 alter[ed] focused step eliminate decide case-by-case actually reached hidden. reason, going reexamine rests. F relating confused unstable state. rulewhich searchapplies, now, logical arrestees. takes uncritically raises doctrinal practical effort address. Why, example, type evidence-gathering "reason believe" cause? restricted arrest? contain crime, reason-to-believe possesses compartment. generally evidence, limitation obscure.[2] Respondent Respondent's argument rests incorrect, disregards delineation reexamination day, undertaken *1732 all. reverse below. NOTES [1] unable 80-328). [2] 324 375, 379 (C.A.5 2003) lying facedown surrounded 6-to-10 Edwards, 242 928, 938 (C.A.10 2001) (finding unauthorized car), Vasey, 834 F.2d 782, 787 (C.A.9 1987) 30-to-45 minutes Hrasky, 1099, 1102 (C.A.8 2006) (upholding hour car); Weaver, 433 1104, 1106 10-to-15 White, 871 41, 44 (C.A.6 1989) cruiser). [3] abated Murphy, 221 Fed.Appx. 715, 717 2007); F.3d, 1100; 1105; Williams, 399, 401 2006); Dorsey, 418 1038, 1041 2005); Osife, 398 1143, 1144 Sumrall, 22, 24 2004). [4] safe effectuate remains. W. Search Seizure (4th ed.2004) LaFave) availability measures "ensur[es] nonexistence `control' doubt"). [5] Garrison, 480 79, 84, 107 1013, (1987); 760-761, 2034; Stanford 476, 480-484, 506, 13 431 (1965); 389-392, (1914); Boyd 116 616, 624-625, 6 524, 29 746 (1886); 10 C. Works John Adams 247-248 (1856). limitless exploratory LaFave 527 (observing otherwise cover prohibits"); McLaughlin, 889, 894 1999) (Trott, concurring) condone "purely definite objective find"); Pallone, 2001 WI 77, ¶¶ 87-90, 236 Wis. 162, 203-204, 9, 613 N.W.2d 568, 588, 9 (2000) (Abrahamson, dissenting) (same); Pierce, 136 N.J. 184, 211, 642 A.2d 947, 961 (1994) [6] Caseres, 533 1064, 1072 (declining residence), Rainey Commonwealth, 197 S.W.3d 89, 94-95 (Ky.2006) (applying Black 810 713, 716 (Ind.2004) auto repair shop outside). [7] 890-891 commenced scene), Snook, 605, 608 1996) (same), Doward, 41 789, 793 (C.A.1 1994) continued Lugo, 978 634 1992) invalid Badgett, 200 Conn. 427-428, 512 160, 169 (1986) scene). [8] eight Vermont, Jersey, Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Wyoming declined constitutions. Bauder, 181 Vt. 401, 924 38, 46-47 (2007); Eckel, 185 523, 540, 888 1266, 1277 (2006); Camacho Nev. 395, 399-400, 370, 373-374 (2003); Vasquez 990 P.2d 488-489 (Wyo.1999); Arredondo, N.M. 636, 944 276, 1997-NMCA-081 (Ct.App.), Steinzig, 987 409, 1999-NMCA-107 (Ct.App.); Commonwealth 543 Pa. 45, 57, 896, 902 (1995); People Blasich, 73 673, 678, 40, 43 (1989); Fesler, Or.App. 609, 612, 1014, 1016-1017 (1984). Massachusetts statute seizing Toole, Mass. 159, 161-162, 448 1264, 1266-1267 (1983) Gen. Laws, ch. 1 (West 2007)). [9] accuses "overrul[ing]" so." 1726. claim, urged. chosen describe resulting advocated [10] 463, Robbins 444, 2841, 744 THOMAS 905, GINSBURG [11] accepted, qualified immunity shield liability understanding. Moskovitz, Rule Reason: Empirical Reexamination 2002 L.Rev. 657, 665. uncommon address fear persons passengers attempt scene. it, either.

Category: 0