The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Monday, March 1, 1982
Decision: Tuesday, June 1, 1982
Issues: Criminal Procedure, Search and Seizure, Vehicles
Categories: fourth amendment, precedent, searches and seizures

Advocates

Andrew L. Frey (Argued the cause for the United States)
William J. Garber (Argued the cause for the respondent)

Facts of the Case

Acting on a tip that Ross was selling drugs from his car in the District of Columbia, police officers pulled Ross over, opened his trunk, and discovered a bag of heroin. After returning to the station, another search uncovered $3200 in cash. Officers acted without a warrant in each search.

Question

Did the police violate the Fourth Amendment?

Conclusion

The Court held that since the search was done with probable cause and extended into the realm (Ross's car) of which a magistrate issuing a warrant would have approved, the officers did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Justice Stevens defended the search of the vehicle's trunk, arguing that if probable cause justifies a vehicle search, then every part of the vehicle is open to inspection.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 6 votes for United States, 3 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Amendment 4: Fourth Amendment
Voted with the majority
Burger
Voted with the minority, joined Marshall's dissent
Brennan
Wrote a dissent
White
Wrote a dissent
Marshall
Wrote a regular concurrence
Blackmun
Wrote a regular concurrence
Powell
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Wrote the majority opinion
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Full Opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1981/1981_80_2209/>
(last visited ).