{"id":6004,"date":"2011-12-28T18:58:46","date_gmt":"2011-09-11T07:34:14","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-09-11T07:34:14","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6004","title":{"rendered":"CA9: Search of car for passenger’s ID unreasonable"},"content":{"rendered":"

Defendant was stopped on suspicion of having an underage prostitute in the car. When she could not produce an ID, the officer searched the car for her ID, and that was an invalid search. United States v. Rodgers<\/a>, 656 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2011):<\/p>\n

Passenger and vehicle searches have played a prominent role in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. The Supreme Court has consistently held that probable cause is necessary to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle. See Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 160-62, 45 S. Ct. 280, 69 L. Ed. 543, T.D. 3686 (1925); California v. Carney, 471 U.S. 386, 390, 105 S. Ct. 2066, 85 L. Ed. 2d 406 (1985). In recent years, the Court has clarified that \u201c[i]f there is probable cause to believe a vehicle contains evidence of criminal activity,\u201d the search may extend to any area where evidence might be found. See Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S. Ct. 1710, 1721, 173 L. Ed. 2d 485 (2009) (citing United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 820-21, 102 S. Ct. 2157, 72 L. Ed. 2d 572 (1982)). In addition, when an arrest is made, a warrantless search is permitted \u201cif the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment … or it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest.\u201d Id. at 1723. But the Court has never sanctioned a vehicle search simply because there was probable cause to arrest a passenger or because a passenger could not provide identification. The Fourth Amendment requires more.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u201cThe fact that an informant who admitted dealing drugs had pled guilty to drug charges in federal court was not critical to a finding of probable cause.\u201d Therefore, no Franks violation. United States v. Amaya, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99617 (N.D. Iowa September 6, 2011), R&R 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99702 (N.D. Iowa August 8, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6004","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6004","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\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6004"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6004\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6004"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6004"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6004"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}