Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]
United States v. Ross | 456 U.S. 798 (1982)
Under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, the warrantless search of an automobile is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if there’s probable cause to believe that the vehicle contains contraband. In the 1982 decision United States versus Ross, the United States Supreme Court considered whether the automobile exception to the warrant requirement applies to closed containers found inside a vehicle when there’s probable cause to perform a warrantless search.
On November 27th, 1978, a reliable police informant notified a detective at the District of Columbia Police Department that an individual was selling narcotics out of the trunk of a car on Ridge Street. The informant said he’d observed the individual complete a sale, saw there were additional narcotics in the trunk, and gave a detailed description of the individual and car.
Police then drove to the area and found a vehicle that met the informant’s description. After circling the neighborhood, officers pulled alongside the car and discovered that the driver was Albert Ross. The officers then told Ross to get out of the vehicle and proceeded to search the vehicle.
During a search of the car’s interior, police found a pistol in the glove compartment. The police then arrested Ross, took his keys, and searched the trunk of his vehicle, where they found a closed brown paper bag. An officer then opened the paper bag and discovered a number of small plastic bags containing a white powder that was later identified as heroin. Further, the police found a zippered red leather pouch in the trunk that contained $3,200 in cash.
Subsequently, Ross was charged in federal district court with possession of heroin with the intent to distribute. Prior to trial, Ross moved to suppress evidence of the heroin and money, arguing that they were obtained in violation of his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches. The court denied the motion, and Ross was convicted. Ross then appealed to the D.C. Court of Appeals, which, following a rehearing en banc, or before the entire court, reversed and vacated Ross’s conviction. The Supreme Court granted cert.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]
Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]
Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]
Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
