UT won’t require warrant under automobile exception

“Rigby contends that the Utah Constitution provides its citizens greater protection against unreasonable searches than the United States Constitution because Utah courts have required police officers to have both probable cause and exigent circumstances when performing a warrantless search under the automobile exception. He concedes the officers had probable cause to search his automobile following the traffic stop but asserts that they violated his constitutional rights by conducting the search without a warrant in the absence of exigent circumstances. Because we are reluctant to diverge from our supreme court’s historical pattern of paralleling federal search and seizure law, we conclude that law enforcement officers were only required to have probable cause to justify the search of Rigby’s vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. Accordingly, we affirm.” State v. Rigby, 2016 UT App 42, 2016 Utah App. LEXIS 45 (March 3, 2016)

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, State constitution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.