17 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2026 10 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Arizona v. Gantgreen2 sentences2021See Gant, 556 US at 351 (emphasis added) (“Police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest only if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search or it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest. 2021See Gant, 556 US at 351 (emphasis added) (“Police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest only if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search or it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest. | 3 | 4 |
People v. Solomongreen2 sentences2025See People v Solomon, 220 Mich App 527, 529-530 ; 560 NW2d 651 (1996) (applying the doctrine of search incident to arrest). 2025See People v Solomon, 220 Mich App 527, 529-530 ; 560 NW2d 651 (1996) (applying the doctrine of search incident to arrest). | 1 | 2 |
Illinois v. Lafayettegreen2 sentences2020See Illinois v Lafayette, 462 US 640 , 644- 645; 103 S Ct 2605 ; 77 L Ed 2d 65 (1983) (holding that an officer may “search the area within the arrestee’s immediate control”). 2020See Illinois v Lafayette, 462 US 640 , 644- 645; 103 S Ct 2605 ; 77 L Ed 2d 65 (1983) (holding that an officer may “search the area within the arrestee’s immediate control”). | 1 | 2 |
People v. Arterberrygreen2 sentences2007See also People v. Arterberry, 431 Mich. 381, 384-385 , 429 N.W.2d 574 (1988); People v. Champion, 452 Mich. 92, 116 , 549 N.W.2d 849 (1996). 2007See also People v. Arterberry, 431 Mich. 381, 384-385 , 429 N.W.2d 574 (1988); People v. Champion, 452 Mich. 92, 116 , 549 N.W.2d 849 (1996). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Eaton
green
2 sentences2024“Fundamental to the search incident to arrest exception [to the Warrant Clause of the Fourth Amendment] is the requirement that there must be a lawful arrest in order to establish the authority to search.” People v Eaton, 241 Mich App 459, 463 ; 617 NW2d 363 (2000). 2024“Fundamental to the search incident to arrest exception is the requirement that there must be a lawful arrest in order to establish the authority to search.” Eaton, 241 Mich App at 463 .4 “A custodial arrest of a suspect based on probable cause is a reasonable intrusion under the Fourth Amendment; that intrusion being lawful, a search incident to the arrest requires no additional 4 In People v Gonzales, 356 Mich 247, 253 ; 97 NW2d 16 (1959), our Supreme Court adopted the definition of “arrest” stated in 4 Am Jur, Arrest, § 2: An arrest is the taking, seizing, or detaining of the person of anot | 4 | 2021–2024 |
People v. Champion
green
2 sentences2026However, our Supreme Court has ruled that “[a] search conducted immediately before an arrest may be justified as incident to arrest if the police have probable cause to arrest the suspect before conducting the search.” Champion, 452 Mich at 115-116 . 2007See also People v. Arterberry, 431 Mich. 381, 384-385 , 429 N.W.2d 574 (1988); People v. Champion, 452 Mich. 92, 116 , 549 N.W.2d 849 (1996). | 2 | 2007–2026 |
Riley v. Cal. United States
green
2 sentences2019However, the Court clarified that “even though the search incident to arrest exception does not apply to cell phones, other case-specific exceptions may still justify a warrantless search of a particular phone.” Id. at [401-402], 134 S Ct at 2494 . 2019However, the Court clarified that “even though the search incident to arrest exception does not apply to cell phones, other case-specific exceptions may still justify a warrantless search of a particular phone.” Id. at [401-402], 134 S Ct at 2494 . | 2 | 2016–2019 |
United States v. Edwards
green
2 sentences2026The “lawful search of an item on an arrestee’s person immediately after arrest [is] already reasonable” under the search-incident-to-arrest exception and “a reasonable delay in conducting that permissible search [does] not render the search unreasonable.” People v Hughes, 506 Mich 512 ; 958 NW2d 98 (2020), citing United States v Edwards, 415 US 800, 805 ; 94 S Ct 1234 ; 39 L Ed 2d 771 1974 ). 2026The “lawful search of an item on an arrestee’s person immediately after arrest [is] already reasonable” under the search-incident-to-arrest exception and “a reasonable delay in conducting that permissible search [does] not render the search unreasonable.” People v Hughes, 506 Mich 512 ; 958 NW2d 98 (2020), citing United States v Edwards, 415 US 800, 805 ; 94 S Ct 1234 ; 39 L Ed 2d 771 1974 ). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
People v. Gonzales
green
2 sentences2024“Fundamental to the search incident to arrest exception is the requirement that there must be a lawful arrest in order to establish the authority to search.” Eaton, 241 Mich App at 463 .4 “A custodial arrest of a suspect based on probable cause is a reasonable intrusion under the Fourth Amendment; that intrusion being lawful, a search incident to the arrest requires no additional 4 In People v Gonzales, 356 Mich 247, 253 ; 97 NW2d 16 (1959), our Supreme Court adopted the definition of “arrest” stated in 4 Am Jur, Arrest, § 2: An arrest is the taking, seizing, or detaining of the person of anot 2024“Fundamental to the search incident to arrest exception is the requirement that there must be a lawful arrest in order to establish the authority to search.” Eaton, 241 Mich App at 463 .4 “A custodial arrest of a suspect based on probable cause is a reasonable intrusion under the Fourth Amendment; that intrusion being lawful, a search incident to the arrest requires no additional 4 In People v Gonzales, 356 Mich 247, 253 ; 97 NW2d 16 (1959), our Supreme Court adopted the definition of “arrest” stated in 4 Am Jur, Arrest, § 2: An arrest is the taking, seizing, or detaining of the person of anot | 1 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Davis
green
2 sentences2023People v Davis, 250 Mich App 357, 362 ; 649 NW2d 94 (2002). 2023People v Davis, 250 Mich App 357, 362 ; 649 NW2d 94 (2002). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
People v. Nguyen
green
1 sentence2021“A custodial arrest based on probable cause is not an unreasonable intrusion under the Fourth Amendment.” Nguyen, 305 Mich App at 751 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
People of Michigan v. Larry Gerald Mead
green
2 sentences2018In People v Mead, 320 Mich App 613 ; 908 NW2d 555 (2017), this Court analyzed the search incident to arrest exception separate from the inventory search exception in determining whether a particular search of a defendant was constitutional. 2018In People v Mead, 320 Mich App 613 ; 908 NW2d 555 (2017), this Court analyzed the search incident to arrest exception separate from the inventory search exception in determining whether a particular search of a defendant was constitutional. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Chimel v. California
red
2 sentences2018Gant, 556 US at 338, 347-348 ; Chimel v California, 395 US 752, 763 ; 89 S Ct 2034 ; 23 L Ed 2d 685 (1969). 2018Gant, 556 US at 338, 347-348 ; Chimel v California, 395 US 752, 763 ; 89 S Ct 2034 ; 23 L Ed 2d 685 (1969). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
People v. Houstina
neutral
1 sentence2000Houstina, supra at 75 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.