arrest exception in Michigan

2026“A search incident to an arrest is an exception to the warrant requirement, and may occur whenever there is probable cause to arrest.” People v Nguyen, 305 Mich App 740, 756 ; 854 NW2d 223 (2014).

2026“A search incident to an arrest is an exception to the warrant requirement, and may occur whenever there is probable cause to arrest.” People v Nguyen, 305 Mich App 740, 756 ; 854 NW2d 223 (2014).

2022The most recent example was Hiibel v Sixth Judicial Dist Court, 542 US 177 , 181- 182; 124 S Ct 2451 ; 159 L Ed 2d 292 (2004), a case concerning an arrest for violation of a state’s “stop and identify” statute, which authorized detention of a person to learn their identity and effectively required such persons to identify themselves or be arrested.

2022The most recent example was Hiibel v Sixth Judicial Dist Court, 542 US 177 , 181- 182; 124 S Ct 2451 ; 159 L Ed 2d 292 (2004), a case concerning an arrest for violation of a state’s “stop and identify” statute, which authorized detention of a person to learn their identity and effectively required such persons to identify themselves or be arrested.

2017See Brewer v Perrin, 132 Mich App 520, 527 ; 349 NW2d 198 (1983) (“Probable cause to arrest is determined by whether or not the ‘facts available to the police at the moment of arrest would have justified a fair-minded person of average intelligence and judgment in believing that [the arrestee] had committed a felony.’ ”); Dixon v Shiner, 12 Mich App 573, 584 ; 163 NW2d 481 (1967) (holding that to overcome a false arrest claim, there must be probable cause “at the time of the arrest”).

2017See Brewer v Perrin, 132 Mich App 520, 527 ; 349 NW2d 198 (1983) (“Probable cause to arrest is determined by whether or not the ‘facts available to the police at the moment of arrest would have justified a fair-minded person of average intelligence and judgment in believing that [the arrestee] had committed a felony.’ ”); Dixon v Shiner, 12 Mich App 573, 584 ; 163 NW2d 481 (1967) (holding that to overcome a false arrest claim, there must be probable cause “at the time of the arrest”).

2026“Probable cause to arrest exists where the facts and circumstances within an officer’s knowledge and of which he has reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been or is being committed.” People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 115 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996).

2026“Probable cause to arrest exists where the facts and circumstances within an officer’s knowledge and of which he has reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been or is being committed.” People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 115 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996).

2024Our Supreme Court discussed the use of force to make an arrest and the defense of justification in challenging a police officer’s bind over on manslaughter charges in People v Doss, 406 Mich 90 ; 276 NW2d 9 (1979).

2024Our Supreme Court discussed the use of force to make an arrest and the defense of justification in challenging a police officer’s bind over on manslaughter charges in People v Doss, 406 Mich 90 ; 276 NW2d 9 (1979).

2017The Court first noted: "[T]here is no reason to believe that evidence relevant to the crime of arrest would be found in the vehicle" when *428 police are addressing "civil infractions" or a person "driving without a valid license." [ People v. Tavernier , 295 Mich.App. 582 , 586 [ 815 N.W.2d 154 (2012). ]. "[J]ustifying the arrest by the search and at the same time the search by the arrest, just will not do." Smith v. Ohio , 494 U.S. 541 , 543, 110 S.Ct. 1288 , 108 L.Ed.2d 464 (1990) (quotations, alterations, and citation omitted).

2017The Court first noted: "[T]here is no reason to believe that evidence relevant to the crime of arrest would be found in the vehicle" when *428 police are addressing "civil infractions" or a person "driving without a valid license." [ People v. Tavernier , 295 Mich.App. 582 , 586 [ 815 N.W.2d 154 (2012). ]. "[J]ustifying the arrest by the search and at the same time the search by the arrest, just will not do." Smith v. Ohio , 494 U.S. 541 , 543, 110 S.Ct. 1288 , 108 L.Ed.2d 464 (1990) (quotations, alterations, and citation omitted).

2017The Court first noted: "[T]here is no reason to believe that evidence relevant to the crime of arrest would be found in the vehicle" when *428 police are addressing "civil infractions" or a person "driving without a valid license." [ People v. Tavernier , 295 Mich.App. 582 , 586 [ 815 N.W.2d 154 (2012). ]. "[J]ustifying the arrest by the search and at the same time the search by the arrest, just will not do." Smith v. Ohio , 494 U.S. 541 , 543, 110 S.Ct. 1288 , 108 L.Ed.2d 464 (1990) (quotations, alterations, and citation omitted).

2017The Court first noted: "[T]here is no reason to believe that evidence relevant to the crime of arrest would be found in the vehicle" when *428 police are addressing "civil infractions" or a person "driving without a valid license." [ People v. Tavernier , 295 Mich.App. 582 , 586 [ 815 N.W.2d 154 (2012). ]. "[J]ustifying the arrest by the search and at the same time the search by the arrest, just will not do." Smith v. Ohio , 494 U.S. 541 , 543, 110 S.Ct. 1288 , 108 L.Ed.2d 464 (1990) (quotations, alterations, and citation omitted).

2014People v LaBelle, 478 Mich 891 (2007).

1996In New York v Belton, 453 US 454, 460 ; 101 S Ct 2860 ; 69 L Ed 2d 768 (1981), the Supreme Court held that “when a policeman has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the passenger compartment of that automobile.” The difficulty in this case is that defendant was not arrested while he was an occupant of the vehicle.

1996In New York v Belton, 453 US 454, 460 ; 101 S Ct 2860 ; 69 L Ed 2d 768 (1981), the Supreme Court held that “when a policeman has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the passenger compartment of that automobile.” The difficulty in this case is that defendant was not arrested while he was an occupant of the vehicle.

1980The parameters of a search incident to an arrest as an exception to the warrant requirement were set forth in Chimel, supra, 763: "There is ample justification, therefore, for a search of the arrestee’s person and the area 'within his immediate control’ — construing that phrase to mean the area from within which he might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence.

1980The parameters of a search incident to an arrest as an exception to the warrant requirement were set forth in Chimel, supra, 763: "There is ample justification, therefore, for a search of the arrestee's person and the area `within his immediate control' — construing that phrase to mean the area from within which he might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence.