The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Tuesday, January 10, 1989
Decision: Monday, April 3, 1989
Issues: Criminal Procedure, Search and Seizure

Advocates

Robert P. Goldberg (Argued the cause for the respondent)
Paul J. Larkin, Jr. (Argued the cause for the United States)

Facts of the Case

Drug Enforcement Administration agents stopped Sokolow in Honolulu International Airport after his behavior indicated he may be a drug trafficker: he paid $2,100 in cash for airline tickets, he was not traveling under his own name, his original destination was Miami, he appeared nervous during the trip, and he checked none of his luggage. Agents arrested Sokolow and searched his luggage without a warrant. Later, at the DEA office, agents obtained warrants allowing more extensive searches and they discovered 1,063 grams of cocaine.

Question

Did the search violate the Fourth Amendment?

Conclusion

The Court upheld the search and reasoned that the agents had a "reasonable suspicion that respondent was engaged in wrongdoing." Chief Justice Rehnquist argued that the validity of such a stop should be based on the "totality of the circumstances," (United States v. Cortez, 1981), which, in this case, gave agents a clear reason to suspect Sokolow of drug trafficking.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 7 votes for United States, 2 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Amendment 4: Fourth Amendment
Wrote the majority opinion
Rehnquist
Voted with the minority, joined Marshall's dissent
Brennan
Voted with the majority
White
Wrote a dissent
Marshall
Voted with the majority
Blackmun
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Full Opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1 (1989),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_87_1295/>
(last visited ).