Arizona V. Gant- A Strengthening Of The Fourth Amendment

Both law enforcement officers and criminal defense attorney's should be aware of the recent Supreme Court decision in Arizona v

. Gant, as the decision may provide an opportunity for Defendant's to challenge the admissibility of evidence obtained during a vehicle search incident to a suspect's arrest. In the Gant case, the Supreme Court reversed the search of Rodney Gant's vehicle, which happened after Mr. Gant, who was arrested for driving on a undecided license, was handcuffed and tied in the back of a police vehicle. Gant's vehicle was subsequently searched and the Police found a bag of cocaine and a gun.

Prior to Gant, the Supreme Court had adjudged the above mentioned search event to an arrest exception to the Fourth Amendment, pursuant to the holdings in several important decisions. The holdings of Chimel and Belton was an example. Under Chimel, police may do a search incident to an arrest for the space in an arrestee's immediate control, which the Court said as "the area within which he might gain ownership of a weapon or destructible evidence." 395 U.S., at 763. The rule set forth in Chimel was later applied to vehicle searches in New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981), and subsequently addressed in Thornton v. United States, 541 U.S. 615 (2004).

Over the period of the last twenty-eight years, while Belton was decided, many Court's have escalated the application of Belton, which has led a lot of law enforcement officers to believe that a search of the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to an otherwise genuine arrest is essentially always permissible. The Clarification which was needed was provided by the decision in Gant. The Gant decision stands for the intention that a search of the passenger compartment of a vehicle leading to an arrest is only valid if- (1) an arrestee is within reaching place of the passenger compartment at the time of the search or (2) it is sensible to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of detain. In absence of sufficient justification the police has to shoe some other evidence to warrant. Id.

The Gant decision is quite recent, and as of now, it's unclear what result this decision will have on criminal defense attorney's, defendants, or the law enforcement community. The decision may depress many criminal lawyers as defence attorney. At this point, it is still very early to tell what impact, if any, the Gant decision may have on crime statistics, or officer safety; however, the Supreme Court obviously documented the importance in revisiting this issue, and has allowed some much needed direction for officers conducting warrantless vehicle searches incident to an arrest.

by: Jamie Hanson

POST COMMENT

Get The Right Accident Advice By State Criminal Records Search Chancel Repair Liability: 21 Things You Need To Know And Then Mostly Forget 61% Of Legal Departments Seek Alternate Billing Structures From The Outside Counsel They Hire B.leaf From Our Intrepid Embedded 2l Correspondent Mini-bleaf: German Contracts And Efficient Draftingkurz Ist Nett Road Traffic Accident Compensation Claims Michigan Drunk Driving Accidents And Dram Shop Laws How Long Will It Take To Get A Work Permit? Involved In A Colorado Motorcycle Accident? What You Need To Know How To Run Background Checks Car And Truck Accident Lawyers In Florida Download And Watch Twilight The New Moon - The Legal Way To Download Twilight Saga And New Movies