CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - SEARCH AND SEIZURE - A FULL SEARCH OF THE ARRESTEE'S PERSON INCIDENT TO A LAWFUL ARREST IS ALWAYS A REASONABLE SEARCH UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT - UNITED STATES V ROBINSON, 414 US 218 (1973)

• NCJ Number: 15002
• Journal: Cincinnati Law Review Volume: 43 Issue: 2 Dated: (1974) Pages: 428-437
• Author(s): S WILLIAMS
• Date Published: 1974
• Length: 10 pages
• Corporate Author: University of Cincinnati Law Review
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

CRITIQUE OF THE SUPREME COURT'S RATIONAL IN RULING THAT THE LAWFULNESS OF THE ARREST JUSTIFIES A FULL SEARCH OF THE ARRESTEE'S PERSON.

Abstract

THE COURT'S RULING IN UNITED STATES V. ROBINSON WAS BASED ON THREE PRIMARY CONCLUSIONS - 1) PRIOR CASE LAW RECOGNIZES AN UNQUALIFIED AUTHORITY ON THE PART OF THE ARRESTING OFFICER TO CONDUCT A SEARCH OF THE ARRESTEE INCIDENT TO THE ARREST, 2) THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A NEED FOR A FULL SEARCH OF THE ARRESTEE INCIDENT TO A LAWFUL CUSTODIAL ARREST IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE OFFICER, AND 3) A PERSON RETAINS NO SIGNIFICANT FOURTH AMENDMENT INTEREST IN THE PRIVACY OF HIS PERSON ONCE HE IS SUBJECTED TO A LAWFUL CUSTODIAL ARREST. DIFFERENT COURT DECISIONS ON THE SCOPE AND REASONABLENESS OF POLICE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES ARE CITED AND DISCUSSED AS THEY RELATE TO UNITED STATES V. ROBINSON. THE AUTHOR CONTENDS THAT, BY RULING AS IT DID, THE SUPREME COURT DID NOT EXPLAIN WHY AN ARREST FOR A TRAFFIC VIOLATION (ROBINSON) SHOULD GIVE RISE TO A SEARCH OF, RATHER THAN CUSTODIAL POSSESION OF THE ARRESTEE'S PERSONAL EFFECTS. HE CONCLUDES THAT INSTEAD OF DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST AND SEARCH INCIDENT TO INVESTIGATORY STOP, THE COURT SHOULD HAVE DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN WARRANTLESS SEARCHES WHICH SERVE LEGITIMATE PROTECTIVE AND EVIDENTIARY FUNCTIONS AND THOSE THAT DO NOT. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)