The automobile exception to the warrant requirement was first established by the Supreme Court in Carroll v. United States (1925), and provides that, if a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that a vehicle has evidence of a crime or contraband located in it, a search of the vehicle may be conducted without first obtaining a warrant. 267 U.S. 132 (1925)
There are two rationales for this exception: (1) inherent mobility of vehicles typically makes it impracticable to require a warrant to search, (2) reduced expectation of privacy in a vehicle supports allowing a warrantless search based on probable cause.
Officers need probable cause. In United States v. Ross, the Supreme Court explained: “[O]nly the prior approval of the magistrate is waived; the search otherwise [must be such] as the magistrate could authorize.” United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982).
The vehicle must also be mobile. California v. Carney, 471 U.S. 386 (1985). https://youtu.be/molCoav8S2Y
SCOPE: Officers may search anywhere they have probable cause to believe that incriminating evidence is located. It is not always the whole vehicle. See California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991). https://youtu.be/ZPmhhCHQhhQ
Anton Vialtsin, Esq.
LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM | Criminal Defense and Business Law
Do you want to buy our Lawstache merchandise? Maybe a t-shirt?
Want to mail me something (usually mustache related)? Send it to 185 West F Street, Suite 100-D, San Diego, CA 92101
Want to learn about our recent victories?
Are you are a Russian speaker? Вы говорите по-русски?
Based in San Diego, CA
Licensed: California, Nevada, and Federal Courts
The San Diego-based business litigation and criminal defense attorneys at LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM are experienced and dedicated professionals singularly focused on one goal: achieving the best results for our clients. Through our hard work and expertise, we guarantee all of our clients that we will diligently protect their rights and zealously pursue justice. Our clients deserve nothing less!