10 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2010 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thornton v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2010In another concurring opinion, Justice Scalia suggested limiting a Belton search to cases where it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be “found in the vehicle.” Thornton, 541 U.S. at 632 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). ¶20 In Gant , the Court rejected the long-accepted broad interpretation of the Belton rule because it “untether [ed] the rule from the justifications underlying the Chimel exception — a result clearly incompatible with our statement in Belton that it ‘in no way alters the fundamental principles established in the Chimel case regarding t 2010In another concurring opinion, Justice Scalia suggested limiting a Belton search to cases where it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be “found in the vehicle.” Thornton, 541 U.S. at 632 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). ¶20 In Gant , the Court rejected the long-accepted broad interpretation of the Belton rule because it “untether [ed] the rule from the justifications underlying the Chimel exception — a result clearly incompatible with our statement in Belton that it ‘in no way alters the fundamental principles established in the Chimel case regarding t | 2 | 4 |
New York v. Beltonred2 sentences2010In another concurring opinion, Justice Scalia suggested limiting a Belton search to cases where it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be “found in the vehicle.” Thornton, 541 U.S. at 632 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). ¶20 In Gant , the Court rejected the long-accepted broad interpretation of the Belton rule because it “untether [ed] the rule from the justifications underlying the Chimel exception — a result clearly incompatible with our statement in Belton that it ‘in no way alters the fundamental principles established in the Chimel case regarding t 2010In another concurring opinion, Justice Scalia suggested limiting a Belton search to cases where it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be “found in the vehicle.” Thornton, 541 U.S. at 632 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). ¶20 In Gant , the Court rejected the long-accepted broad interpretation of the Belton rule because it “untether [ed] the rule from the justifications underlying the Chimel exception — a result clearly incompatible with our statement in Belton that it ‘in no way alters the fundamental principles established in the Chimel case regarding t | 1 | 3 |
United States v. Dowardgreen2 sentences1997See also United States v. *1084 Doward, 41 F.3d 789 , 793 n. 2 (1st Cir.1994) (the Belton rule extends to any container even though its appearance may foreclose possibility it holds a weapon or evidence); 3 W. 1997See also United States v. *1084 Doward, 41 F.3d 789 , 793 n. 2 (1st Cir.1994) (the Belton rule extends to any container even though its appearance may foreclose possibility it holds a weapon or evidence); 3 W. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Penny Portergreen2 sentences1992See, e.g., United States v. Porter, 738 F.2d 622 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 983 , 83 L. 1992See, e.g., United States v. Porter, 738 F.2d 622 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 983 , 83 L. | 1 | 1 |
Fritzie v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1992See, e.g., United States v. Porter, 738 F.2d 622 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 983 , 83 L. 1992See, e.g., United States v. Porter, 738 F.2d 622 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 983 , 83 L. | 1 | 1 |
Holman v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1992See, e.g., United States v. Porter, 738 F.2d 622 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 983 , 83 L. 1992See, e.g., United States v. Porter, 738 F.2d 622 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 983 , 83 L. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Rittegreen2 sentences1988State v. Hernandez, 410 So. 2d 1381, 1384-85 (La. 1982); see also State v. Ritte,_Hawaii —, 710 P.2d 1197, 1201 (1985) (holding, after discussing the purposes of the search incident to arrest exception, that a search was not within the exception as the "arrestees had already been taken from the area"). 1988State v. Hernandez, 410 So. 2d 1381, 1384-85 (La. 1982); see also State v. Ritte,_Hawaii —, 710 P.2d 1197, 1201 (1985) (holding, after discussing the purposes of the search incident to arrest exception, that a search was not within the exception as the "arrestees had already been taken from the area"). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hernandezgreen2 sentences1988State v. Hernandez, 410 So. 2d 1381, 1384-85 (La. 1982); see also State v. Ritte,_Hawaii —, 710 P.2d 1197, 1201 (1985) (holding, after discussing the purposes of the search incident to arrest exception, that a search was not within the exception as the "arrestees had already been taken from the area"). 1988State v. Hernandez, 410 So. 2d 1381, 1384-85 (La. 1982); see also State v. Ritte,_Hawaii —, 710 P.2d 1197, 1201 (1985) (holding, after discussing the purposes of the search incident to arrest exception, that a search was not within the exception as the "arrestees had already been taken from the area"). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Stroud
red
2 sentences1997Lafave, Search and Seizure § 7.1(c), at p. 453 (3d ed.1996) (the Belton rule eliminates "case-by-case judgments [by the police] as to where weapons or evidence might be located" or, "whether there could be any weapons or evidence in light of the nature of the crime for which the arrest was made.") In State v. Stroud, 106 Wash.2d 144 , 720 P.2d 436 (1986), the Supreme Court considered the application of Belton in this state, in light of our constitution's protection of the privacy rights of its citizens. 1997Lafave, Search and Seizure § 7.1(c), at p. 453 (3d ed.1996) (the Belton rule eliminates "case-by-case judgments [by the police] as to where weapons or evidence might be located" or, "whether there could be any weapons or evidence in light of the nature of the crime for which the arrest was made.") In State v. Stroud, 106 Wash.2d 144 , 720 P.2d 436 (1986), the Supreme Court considered the application of Belton in this state, in light of our constitution's protection of the privacy rights of its citizens. | 3 | 1997–2001 |
Arizona v. Gant
green
2 sentences2010In another concurring opinion, Justice Scalia suggested limiting a Belton search to cases where it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be “found in the vehicle.” Thornton, 541 U.S. at 632 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). ¶20 In Gant , the Court rejected the long-accepted broad interpretation of the Belton rule because it “untether [ed] the rule from the justifications underlying the Chimel exception — a result clearly incompatible with our statement in Belton that it ‘in no way alters the fundamental principles established in the Chimel case regarding t 2010In another concurring opinion, Justice Scalia suggested limiting a Belton search to cases where it is reasonable to believe evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be “found in the vehicle.” Thornton, 541 U.S. at 632 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). ¶20 In Gant , the Court rejected the long-accepted broad interpretation of the Belton rule because it “untether [ed] the rule from the justifications underlying the Chimel exception — a result clearly incompatible with our statement in Belton that it ‘in no way alters the fundamental principles established in the Chimel case regarding t | 2 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Gant
green
2 sentences2008The Arizona court noted that the decision in Thornton left that question unresolved and agreed with Justice Scalia’s concurrence, where he stated that applying the Belton doctrine to justify a search of the car of a person handcuffed and confined in a police car “ ‘stretches [the doctrine] beyond its breaking point.’ ” Id. at 4 n.2 (alteration in original) (quoting Thornton, 541 U.S. at 625 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment)). 2008The Arizona court noted that the decision in Thornton left that question unresolved and agreed with Justice Scalia’s concurrence, where he stated that applying the Belton doctrine to justify a search of the car of a person handcuffed and confined in a police car “ ‘stretches [the doctrine] beyond its breaking point.’ ” Id. at 4 n.2 (alteration in original) (quoting Thornton, 541 U.S. at 625 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment)). | 2 | 2008–2008 |
United States v. Albert Thomas (92-4344) and Angelique Dupree (93-3026)
green
2 sentences1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). 1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
United States v. Nicolas Alvarado Garcia
green
2 sentences1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). 1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
United States v. Jorge Humberto Diaz-Lizaraza
green
2 sentences1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). 1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Hicklin v. United States
green
2 sentences1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). 1995The term "automobile” used in the Belton rule has been construed to apply to other types of vehicles including trucks, see United States v. Diaz-Lizaraza, 981 F.2d 1216 (11th Cir. 1993); pickup trucks, see United States v. Thomas, 11 F.3d 620 (6th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1570 (1994); and dump trucks, United States v. Garcia, 781 F.2d 422 (5th Cir. 1986). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
United States v. Sheri Lee McCrady
green
1 sentence1988McCrady, 774 F.2d at 872 . | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.