Illegal Search and Seizure 

In 1999, Rodney Gant was arrested in Tucson, Arizona, for driving with a suspended license. After he was handcuffed and locked in a patrol car, officers searched his vehicle and found cocaine and a gun.

Decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2009, Arizona v. Gant redefined the scope of warrantless vehicle searches under the Fourth Amendment. Rodney Gant was arrested for driving with a suspended license, handcuffed, and placed in a patrol car.

Officers then searched his vehicle and discovered cocaine in the backseat. Gant challenged the search as unconstitutional, arguing it violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches.

• Does Belton permit vehicle searches automatically after an arrest, even if the arrestee is restrained?
• Under what circumstances do warrantless vehicle searches comply with the Fourth Amendment?

• 1. Arizona Trial Court

  Denied Gant’s motion to suppress the evidence.

• 2. Arizona Supreme Court

  Reversed the decision, ruling the search unconstitutional.

• 3. U.S. Supreme Court

  Granted certiorari and upheld the Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling in a 5-4 decision.

Gant narrowed Belton’s scope, balancing Fourth Amendment protections with law enforcement needs. It mandates that vehicle searches post-arrest must be directly tied to safety concerns or evidence preservation. This decision reshaped police protocols, requiring officers to justify warrantless searches based on situational factors.