101 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1973–2026 24 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina 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 |
|---|---|---|
Katz v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2021“Searches conducted without warrants have been held unlawful notwithstanding facts unquestionably showing probable cause, for the Constitution requires that the deliberate, impartial judgment of a judicial officer . . . be interposed between the citizen and the police.” Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 357 , 19 L.Ed.2d 576, 585 (1967) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). ¶ 93 In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court of the United States reviewed a Fourth Amendment challenge to a Maryland statute authorizing the collection of DNA samples taken upon booking after arrest for certai 2021“Searches conducted without warrants have been held unlawful notwithstanding facts unquestionably showing probable cause, for the Constitution requires that the deliberate, impartial judgment of a judicial officer . . . be interposed between the citizen and the police.” Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 357 , 19 L.Ed.2d 576, 585 (1967) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). ¶ 93 In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court of the United States reviewed a Fourth Amendment challenge to a Maryland statute authorizing the collection of DNA samples taken upon booking after arrest for certai | 4 | 7 |
State v. Phillipsgreen2 sentences2022IV. “[T]he touchstone of the Fourth Amendment analysis has been whether a person has a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.” State v. Phillips, 132 N.C.App. 765, 770 , 513 S.E.2d 568, 572 (internal quotation marks omitted), disc. review denied and appeal dismissed, 350 N.C. 846 , 539 S.E.2d 3 (1999). 2022IV. “[T]he touchstone of the Fourth Amendment analysis has been whether a person has a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.” State v. Phillips, 132 N.C.App. 765, 770 , 513 S.E.2d 568, 572 (internal quotation marks omitted), disc. review denied and appeal dismissed, 350 N.C. 846 , 539 S.E.2d 3 (1999). | 4 | 4 |
Whren v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2023Legal Framework for Selective Enforcement The U.S. Constitution “prohibits selective enforcement of the law based on considerations such as race.” Whren, 517 U.S. at 813 (declaring that a Fourth Amendment challenge of a traffic stop as racially motivated should have been brought under the Equal Protection Clause); Ivey, 360 N.C. at 564 (citing Whren to conclude that “this Court will not tolerate discriminatory application of the law based upon a citizen’s race”). 2023Legal Framework for Selective Enforcement The U.S. Constitution “prohibits selective enforcement of the law based on considerations such as race.” Whren, 517 U.S. at 813 (declaring that a Fourth Amendment challenge of a traffic stop as racially motivated should have been brought under the Equal Protection Clause); Ivey, 360 N.C. at 564 (citing Whren to conclude that “this Court will not tolerate discriminatory application of the law based upon a citizen’s race”). | 3 | 5 |
Byrd v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2022However, the Supreme Court has explained that this analysis “is not distinct from the merits” of a Fourth Amendment Claim but “‘is more properly subsumed under substantive Fourth Amendment doctrine.’” Id. (quoting Rakas, 439 U.S. at 139 ). 2022TEAGUE 2022-NCCOA-600 Opinion of the Court Amendment standing “is not distinct from the merits and is more properly subsumed under substantive Fourth Amendment doctrine.” Byrd v. United States, 584 U.S. ___ , ___, 200 L. | 3 | 3 |
State v. McClendongreen2 sentences2022See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996); State v. McClendon, 350 N.C. 630, 635-36 , 517 S.E.2d 128, 131-32 (1999). 2022See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996); State v. McClendon, 350 N.C. 630, 635-36 , 517 S.E.2d 128, 131-32 (1999). | 3 | 3 |
Michigan v. Summersgreen2 sentences2022Summers, 452 U.S. at 700-01 (noting the Fourth Amendment exception for “momentary, on-the- street detention accompanied by a frisk for weapons involved in Terry” before explaining the separate exception applicable to detention incident to a search based upon “the character of the official intrusion and its justification”). 2022Summers, 452 U.S. at 700-01 (noting the Fourth Amendment exception for “momentary, on-the- street detention accompanied by a frisk for weapons involved in Terry” before explaining the separate exception applicable to detention incident to a search based upon “the character of the official intrusion and its justification”). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Millergreen2 sentences2018As the Supreme Court stated in Miller , "[t]o allow plain error review in a case like this one ... would penalize the government for failing to introduce evidence on probable cause for arrest or other matters bearing on the Fourth Amendment claim when defendant's failure to raise an objection before or during trial seemed to make such a showing unnecessary." Id. at ----, 814 S.E.2d at 84 (citation, quotation marks, and brackets omitted). 2018As the Supreme Court stated in Miller , "[t]o allow plain error review in a case like this one ... would penalize the government for failing to introduce evidence on probable cause for arrest or other matters bearing on the Fourth Amendment claim when defendant's failure to raise an objection before or during trial seemed to make such a showing unnecessary." Id. at ----, 814 S.E.2d at 84 (citation, quotation marks, and brackets omitted). | 3 | 3 |
New York v. Classgreen2 sentences2023The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized that “the State’s intrusion into a particular area, whether in an automobile or elsewhere, cannot result in a Fourth Amendment violation unless the area is one in which there is a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.” New York v. Class, 475 U.S. 106, 112 , 89 L. 2023The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized that “the State’s intrusion into a particular area, whether in an automobile or elsewhere, cannot result in a Fourth Amendment violation unless the area is one in which there is a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.” New York v. Class, 475 U.S. 106, 112 , 89 L. | 2 | 3 |
United States v. Chavez-Valenciagreen2 sentences2019Cf. United States v. Chavez-Valencia , 116 F.3d 127 , 132 (5th Cir. 1997) ("If, at trial, the government assumes that a defendant will not seek to suppress certain evidence, the government may justifiably conclude that it need not introduce the quality or quantity of evidence needed otherwise to prevail."). 2018Cf. United States v. Chavez-Valencia , 116 F.3d 127 , 132 (5th Cir.) ("If, at trial, the government assumes that a defendant will not seek to suppress certain evidence, the government may justifiably conclude that it need not introduce the quality or quantity of evidence needed *85 otherwise to prevail."), cert. denied , 522 U.S. 926 , 118 S.Ct. 325 , 139 L.Ed.2d 252 (1997). | 2 | 3 |
Brown v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2015Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590, 603-04 , 45 L. 2015Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590, 603-04 , 45 L. | 2 | 3 |
Dunaway v. New Yorkgreen2 sentences1983"Indeed, if the Fifth Amendment has been violated, the Fourth Amendment issue would not have to be reached." Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200, 217 , 60 L.Ed.2d 824, 839 , 99 S.Ct. 2248, 2259 (1979). 1983"Indeed, if the Fifth Amendment has been violated, the Fourth Amendment issue would not have to be reached." Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200, 217 , 60 L.Ed.2d 824, 839 , 99 S.Ct. 2248, 2259 (1979). | 2 | 3 |
United States v. Joshua Brent Gray, United States of America v. Terrence A. Askewgreen2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Gray, 491 F.3d 138, 153 (4th Cir. 2007) (“[W]e have recognized that persons other 6 Courts often denote this inquiry as whether a defendant has “standing” to press a Fourth Amendment claim. 2022See, e.g., United States v. Gray, 491 F.3d 138, 153 (4th Cir. 2007) (“[W]e have recognized that persons other 6 Courts often denote this inquiry as whether a defendant has “standing” to press a Fourth Amendment claim. | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Jacobsengreen2 sentences2022Such an unreasonable search “occurs when an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable is infringed.” United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 113 , 104 S.Ct. 1652 , 80 L.Ed.2d 85, 94 (1984). 2022Such an unreasonable search “occurs when an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable is infringed.” United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 113 , 104 S.Ct. 1652 , 80 L.Ed.2d 85, 94 (1984). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Bishopgreen2 sentences2020App. 767, 770 , 805 S.E.2d 367, 370 (2017) (“As Bishop concedes, he cannot prevail on [his Fourth Amendment challenge to the trial court’s order imposing lifetime satellite-based monitoring] without the use of Rule 2 because his constitutional argument is waived on appeal. 2020App. 767, 770 , 805 S.E.2d 367, 370 (2017) (“As Bishop concedes, he cannot prevail on [his Fourth Amendment challenge to the trial court’s order imposing lifetime satellite-based monitoring] without the use of Rule 2 because his constitutional argument is waived on appeal. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Bullockgreen2 sentences2018See 370 N.C. at 256 -57 , 805 S.E.2d at 673 . 2018See 370 N.C. at 256 -57 , 805 S.E.2d at 673 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Gricegreen2 sentences2015App. ___, ___, 735 S.E.2d 354, 358 (2012). 2015App. _, __, 735 S.E.2d 354, 358 (2012). | 2 | 2 |
| Smith v. Marylandred | 2 | 2 |
| State v. Cookegreen | 2 | 2 |
New Jersey v. T. L. O.green2 sentences2011Public schools are one context where balancing government against private interests “suggests that the public interest is best served by a Fourth Amendment standard of reasonableness that stops short of probable cause.” Id. at 341 , 83 L. 2011Public schools are one context where balancing government against private interests “suggests that the public interest is best served by a Fourth Amendment standard of reasonableness that stops short of probable cause.” Id. at 341 , 83 L. | 1 | 6 |
Donald H. Brown v. Commissioner of Internal Revenuegreen2 sentences2018LaFave, Search and Seizure § 11.7(e), at 584 (5th ed. 2012) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. Meadows , 523 F.2d 365 , 368 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied , 424 U.S. 970 , 96 S.Ct. 1469 , 47 L.Ed.2d 738 (1976) ). 2018LaFave, Search and Seizure § 11.7(e), at 584 (5th ed. 2012) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. Meadows , 523 F.2d 365 , 368 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied , 424 U.S. 970 , 96 S.Ct. 1469 , 47 L.Ed.2d 738 (1976) ). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Wileygreen2 sentences2003In sum, a defendant challenging a Fourth Amendment violation occurring in the home of another must demonstrate a “legitimate expectation of privacy, which has two components: (1) the person must have an actual expectation of privacy, and (2) the person’s subjective expectation must be one that society deems to be reasonable.” State v. Wiley, 355 N.C. 592, 602 , 565 S.E.2d 22, 32 (2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 117 , 154 L. 2003In sum, a defendant challenging a Fourth Amendment violation occurring in the home of another must demonstrate a “legitimate expectation of privacy, which has two components: (1) the person must have an actual expectation of privacy, and (2) the person’s subjective expectation must be one that society deems to be reasonable.” State v. Wiley, 355 N.C. 592, 602 , 565 S.E.2d 22, 32 (2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 117 , 154 L. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences2012App. at 116 , 454 S.E.2d at 686 , the Supreme Court reversed that decision and upheld the denial of the defendant’s suppression motion on the grounds that the officer took adequate steps to avoid exposing the defendant’s private areas and that “the availability of . . . less intrusive means does not automatically transform an otherwise unreasonable search into a Fourth Amendment violation.” Smith, 118 N.C. 2012App. at 116 , 454 S.E.2d at 686 , the Supreme Court reversed that decision and upheld the denial of the defendant’s suppression motion on the grounds that the officer took adequate steps to avoid exposing the defendant’s private areas and that “the availability of . . . less intrusive means does not automatically transform an otherwise unreasonable search into a Fourth Amendment violation.” Smith, 118 N.C. | 1 | 2 |
| Brendlin v. Californiagreen | 1 | 2 |
| Oliver v. United Statesgreen | 1 | 2 |
| State v. Harveygreen | 1 | 2 |
| State v. McKinneygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Missouri v. McNeelygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Gricegreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Garnergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Morgan v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Millergreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Brignoni-Poncegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Franks v. Delawaregreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Smithgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Stroessenreuthergreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Leongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Rodriguez v. United Statesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Pasourgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Carrouthersgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Hamiltongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Phillips
neutral
2 sentences2022IV. “[T]he touchstone of the Fourth Amendment analysis has been whether a person has a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.” State v. Phillips, 132 N.C.App. 765, 770 , 513 S.E.2d 568, 572 (internal quotation marks omitted), disc. review denied and appeal dismissed, 350 N.C. 846 , 539 S.E.2d 3 (1999). 2022IV. “[T]he touchstone of the Fourth Amendment analysis has been whether a person has a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.” State v. Phillips, 132 N.C.App. 765, 770 , 513 S.E.2d 568, 572 (internal quotation marks omitted), disc. review denied and appeal dismissed, 350 N.C. 846 , 539 S.E.2d 3 (1999). | 3 | 2009–2022 |
Maryland v. King
green
2 sentences2021King, 569 U.S. at 441 , 186 L. 2021King, 569 U.S. at 441 , 186 L. | 3 | 2021–2021 |
Davis v. United States
green
2 sentences2025The exclusionary rule was created as “a deterrent sanction that bars the prosecution from introducing evidence obtained by way of a Fourth Amendment violation.” Davis v. U.S., 564 U.S. 229 , 231–32 (2011). 2025The exclusionary rule was created as “a deterrent sanction that bars the prosecution from introducing evidence obtained by way of a Fourth Amendment violation.” Davis v. U.S., 564 U.S. 229 , 231–32 (2011). | 2 | 2019–2025 |
Rakas v. Illinois
green
2 sentences2022However, the Supreme Court has explained that this analysis “is not distinct from the merits” of a Fourth Amendment Claim but “‘is more properly subsumed under substantive Fourth Amendment doctrine.’” Id. (quoting Rakas, 439 U.S. at 139 ). 2022However, the Supreme Court has explained that this analysis “is not distinct from the merits” of a Fourth Amendment Claim but “‘is more properly subsumed under substantive Fourth Amendment doctrine.’” Id. (quoting Rakas, 439 U.S. at 139 ). | 2 | 2022–2022 |
Chavez-Valencia v. United States
green
2 sentences2018Cf. United States v. Chavez-Valencia , 116 F.3d 127 , 132 (5th Cir.) ("If, at trial, the government assumes that a defendant will not seek to suppress certain evidence, the government may justifiably conclude that it need not introduce the quality or quantity of evidence needed *85 otherwise to prevail."), cert. denied , 522 U.S. 926 , 118 S.Ct. 325 , 139 L.Ed.2d 252 (1997). 2018Cf. United States v. Chavez–Valencia, 116 F.3d 127, 132 (5th Cir.) (“If, at trial, the government assumes that a defendant will not seek to suppress certain evidence, the government may justifiably conclude that it need not introduce the quality or quantity of evidence needed otherwise to prevail.”), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 926 , 118 S. Ct. 325 (1997). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Rubio-Castro v. United States
green
2 sentences2018LaFave, Search and Seizure § 11.7(e), at 584 (5th ed. 2012) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. Meadows , 523 F.2d 365 , 368 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied , 424 U.S. 970 , 96 S.Ct. 1469 , 47 L.Ed.2d 738 (1976) ). 2018LaFave, Search and Seizure § 11.7(e), at 584 (5th ed. 2012) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. Meadows , 523 F.2d 365 , 368 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied , 424 U.S. 970 , 96 S.Ct. 1469 , 47 L.Ed.2d 738 (1976) ). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Lee v. Wainwright
green
2 sentences2018LaFave, Search and Seizure § 11.7(e), at 584 (5th ed. 2012) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. Meadows , 523 F.2d 365 , 368 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied , 424 U.S. 970 , 96 S.Ct. 1469 , 47 L.Ed.2d 738 (1976) ). 2018LaFave, Search and Seizure § 11.7(e), at 584 (5th ed. 2012) (alteration in original) (quoting United States v. Meadows , 523 F.2d 365 , 368 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied , 424 U.S. 970 , 96 S.Ct. 1469 , 47 L.Ed.2d 738 (1976) ). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Daniels v. United States
green
2 sentences2018Cf. United States v. Chavez-Valencia , 116 F.3d 127 , 132 (5th Cir.) ("If, at trial, the government assumes that a defendant will not seek to suppress certain evidence, the government may justifiably conclude that it need not introduce the quality or quantity of evidence needed *85 otherwise to prevail."), cert. denied , 522 U.S. 926 , 118 S.Ct. 325 , 139 L.Ed.2d 252 (1997). 2018Cf. United States v. Chavez–Valencia, 116 F.3d 127, 132 (5th Cir.) (“If, at trial, the government assumes that a defendant will not seek to suppress certain evidence, the government may justifiably conclude that it need not introduce the quality or quantity of evidence needed otherwise to prevail.”), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 926 , 118 S. Ct. 325 (1997). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Maryland v. MacOn
green
2 sentences2016"Whether a Fourth Amendment violation has occurred, [therefore,] 'turns on an objective assessment of the officer's actions in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him at the time,' ... and not on the officer's actual state of mind at the time the challenged action was taken." Maryland v. Macon, 472 U.S. 463 , 470-71, 105 S.Ct. 2778 , 2783, 86 L.Ed.2d 370 , 378 (1985) (citations omitted). 2016"Whether a Fourth Amendment violation has occurred, [therefore,] 'turns on an objective assessment of the officer's actions in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him at the time,' ... and not on the officer's actual state of mind at the time the challenged action was taken." Maryland v. Macon, 472 U.S. 463 , 470-71, 105 S.Ct. 2778 , 2783, 86 L.Ed.2d 370 , 378 (1985) (citations omitted). | 2 | 2011–2016 |
Coolidge v. New Hampshire
green
2 sentences2015This has resulted in confusion of the elements of the “plain view doctrine.” To eliminate this confusion, we believe it appropriate to distinguish the true “plain view doctrine” as established in Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 , 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971), from other situations where officers observe contraband. 2015This has resulted in confusion of the elements of the “plain view doctrine.” To eliminate this confusion, we believe it appropriate to distinguish the true “plain view doctrine” as established in Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 , 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971), from other situations where officers observe contraband. | 2 | 2015–2015 |
| State v. Rivera green | 1 | 2025–2025 |
| State v. Ivey green | 1 | 2023–2023 |
| Florida v. Jardines green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Abel v. United States green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| Simmons v. United States green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| State v. Banks green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| Villa-Chaparro v. United States green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| United States v. Jones green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Samson v. California green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| State v. Blue green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Sampson v. United States green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Grady v. North Carolina green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| State v. Garcia-Lorenzo green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| David Evans v. Patrick Baker green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| State v. Barnes green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Kimmelman v. Morrison green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| United States v. Branch green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| State v. Finch neutral | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| State v. Jackson green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| State v. Rodelo green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| State v. Jones green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| State v. Campbell green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Arizona v. Hicks green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| State v. Barnard green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| State v. Wallace green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| State v. Gibson green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
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.