|
THE CASE
Knowles v. Iowa,
525 U.S. 113 (1998), was a
decision by the
United States Supreme Court
which ruled that the Fourth
Amendment prohibits a police officer from further
searching a vehicle which was stopped for a minor traffic offense
once the officer has written a citation for the offense.
Argued:
November 3, 1998
Decided: December 8, 1998
A law enforcement officer may not search a
person's vehicle without their consent when they are not in custody
once they have been cited without violating the Fourth Amendment
prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. Supreme Court of
Iowa reversed and remanded.
Chief Justice:
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices: John Paul
Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor,
Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy,
David Souter, Clarence
Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
Stephen Breyer
Majority by:
Rehnquist
Joined by: unanimous
Iowa Code §321.485(1)(a); U.S. Const. amend. IV
Knowles was
stopped in Newton, Iowa driving 43 MPH
in a 25 zone. The police officer ticketed Knowles rather than
arresting him, as was permitted under Iowa law. The officer then
searched the car, finding marijuana
and a "pot pipe." Knowles was then arrested and charged with
violation of state laws dealing with controlled substances.
Before
trial, Knowles argued the search was
not applicable to the "search incident to arrest" exception
recognized in United States v. Robinson,
414 U. S. 218 (1973), because he had not been placed under arrest.
At the hearing on the motion to suppress, the police officer
conceded that he had neither Knowles' consent nor probable cause to
conduct the search. He relied on Iowa law dealing with such
searches.
Cartoon courtesy of
Stu's Views
Because Iowa Code
§321.485(1)(a) permits either an arrest or a citation when making a
traffic stop, the Iowa Supreme Court has interpreted this provision
as providing authority to officers to conduct a full-blown search of
an automobile and driver in those cases where police elect not to
make a custodial arrest. The trial court denied the motion to
suppress and the defendant was convicted.
A divided Supreme
Court of Iowa upheld the search and the conviction.
The U.S. Supreme Court decided that the search
was unlawful.
Once Knowles was
stopped for speeding and issued a citation, all the evidence
necessary to prosecute that offense had been obtained. No further
evidence of excessive speed was going to be found either on the
person of the offender or in the passenger compartment of the car.
Because, given the type of stop, there were no
grounds for the officer to believe that his safety was in jeopardy,
and thus had no probable cause to perform a search without consent
of the driver. Also, since Knowles was
not "in custody", there was no custodial exception to permit a
search either. Thus the search was ruled illegal.
The Supreme Court reversed the case and
remanded it for redetermination. |