{"id":13445,"date":"2014-09-25T10:04:16","date_gmt":"2014-09-25T15:04:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=13445"},"modified":"2014-09-25T10:04:16","modified_gmt":"2014-09-25T15:04:16","slug":"dc-mere-open-container-violation-does-not-support-a-search-incident-of-a-car","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=13445","title":{"rendered":"DC: Mere open container violation does not support a search incident of a car"},"content":{"rendered":"

Mere open container violation does not support a search incident of a car without more. United States v. Nash<\/a>, 2014 D.C. App. LEXIS 393 (September 25, 2014):<\/p>\n

Second, the United States cites numerous decisions upholding automobile searches for additional evidence after the police found one or more open containers of alcohol in a vehicle. Those decisions give us pause but ultimately do not persuade us. In most of the cited decisions, other circumstances — not present in Mr. Nash’s case — supported an inference that additional evidence might be found in the vehicle. See, e.g., People v. Souza, 19 Cal. Rptr. 2d 731, 732-35 (Ct. App. 1993) (driver was operating car erratically, officer could smell alcohol coming from car, another passenger was in car, and two-thirds empty bottle of tequila was located behind driver’s side headrest, inside a torn-open box of Budweiser beer). Other decisions are similar to the Seventh Circuit’s decision in McGuire, in that they appear to apply a per se rule that cannot be reconciled with the approach this court adopted in [United States v. Taylor, 49 A.3d 818, 821 (D.C. 2012)]. See, e.g., State v. Collard, 414 N.W.2d 733, 734-36 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988) (search of car for further evidence justified by presence of single open bottle of beer in car; “upon observing evidence in plain view, a warrantless search of the remainder of the passenger compartment is justified”).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mere open container violation does not support a search incident of a car without more. United States v. Nash, 2014 D.C. App. LEXIS 393 (September 25, 2014): Second, the United States cites numerous decisions upholding automobile searches for additional evidence … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13445","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-search-incident"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=13445"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13445\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13446,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13445\/revisions\/13446"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}