skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 50874 Find in a Library
Title: SEARCH INCIDENT TO ARREST - NEW RESTRICTIONS ON AN OLD DOCTRINE?
Journal: FBI LAW ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN  Volume:47  Issue:9  Dated:(SEPTEMBER 1978)  Pages:27-32
Author(s): L E RISSLER
Corporate Author: Federal Bureau of Investigation
US Dept of Justice
United States of America
Date Published: 1978
Page Count: 6
Sponsoring Agency: Federal Bureau of Investigation
Washington, DC 20535-0001
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Document: PDF
Publisher: https://www.fbi.gov 
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: THE CHADWICK CASE IN BOSTON, MASS., RELATING TO SEARCH AND SEIZURE PRINCIPLES IS CITED, AND THE SCOPE OF SEARCHES INCIDENT TO ARRESTS IS EVALUATED.
Abstract: A FUNDAMENTAL ASPECT OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE LAW, EMPHASIZED FREQUENTLY IN DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT, IS THAT POLICE MUST OBTAIN ADVANCE JUDICIAL APPROVAL FOR SEARCHES AND SEIZURES THROUGH THE WARRANT PROCEDURE WHENEVER PRACTICABLE. ALTHOUGH ADHERENCE TO THIS PRINCIPLE HAS BEEN STRICTLY ENFORCED, IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT A SEARCH INCIDENT TO A LAWFUL ARREST IS A TRADITIONAL EXCEPTION TO THE WARRANT REQUIREMENT IN THE FOURTH AMENDMENT. THE PERMISSIBLE SCOPE OF SEARCHES INCIDENT TO ARRESTS INVOLVES TWO LEVELS OF INTRUSION: ONE IS A SEARCH OF THE ACTUAL PERSON OF THE ARRESTEE AND THE OTHER IS A SEARCH OF POSSESSIONS WITHIN THE AREA OF THE ARRESTEE'S IMMEDIATE CONTROL. IN THE CHADWICK CASE, FEDERAL NARCOTICS AGENTS HAD PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT A FOOTLOCKER THAT HAD ARRIVED BY RAIL IN BOSTON FROM SAN DIEGO, CALIF., CONTAINED MARIHUANA. THEY OBSERVED CHADWICK AND OTHERS REMOVE THE FOOTLOCKER FROM THE TRAIN DEPOT AND PLACE IT IN THE TRUNK OF AN AUTOMOBILE. WHILE THE TRUNK LID WAS STILL OPEN, CHADWICK WAS ARRESTED AND THE FOOTLOCKER AND ITS KEYS WERE SEIZED. THE FOOTLOCKER SUBSEQUENTLY WAS SEARCHED IN THE BOSTON FEDERAL BUILDING, LARGE AMOUNTS OF MARIHUANA WERE FOUND, AND CHADWICK WAS CHARGED IN FEDERAL COURT WITH POSSESSION OF MARIHUANA AND CONSPIRACY. THE DECISION OF A U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE THAT A SEARCH WARRANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN OBTAINED TO OPEN THE FOOTLOCKER WAS SUPPORTED BY THE SUPREME COURT. BECAUSE THE FOOTLOCKER COULD NOT BE CHARACTERIZED AS PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY ASSOCIATED WITH CHADWICK'S PERSON, THUS PERMITTING A DELAYED SEARCH, AND BECAUSE THE ARRESTING AGENTS HAD REDUCED IT TO THEIR EXCLUSIVE DOMINION, THUS MAKING IT INACCESSIBLE TO CHADWICK, ITS SEARCH COULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED AS BEING INCIDENTAL TO THE ARREST. A MOTION TO SUPPRESS THE EVIDENCE OF MARIHUANA CONTAINED IN THE FOOTLOCKER WAS GRANTED. THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE CHADWICK CASE ARE DISCUSSED, AND OTHER DECISIONS INVOLVING THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE CHADWICK CASE ARE NOTED. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. (DEP)
Index Term(s): Controlled Substances; Drug law offenses; Judicial decisions; Search and seizure laws; Search warrants
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=50874

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.