United States v. Ross
Significance, Further Readings
Albert Ross, Jr.
That police officers, who had properly stopped an automobile and who had probable cause to believe that there were illegal substances in the car, did not violate the Constitution by searching a container in the car without first obtaining a search warrant.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Andrew L. Frey
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
William J. Gerber
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens (writing for the Court)
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
1 June 1982
That when the police properly stop and search an automobile, the police may search any container within the automobile which could hold the illegal substance which is the subject of the search.
- Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925).
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967).
- Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (1978).
- California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991).
- United States v. Salerno - Significance, Background, Rights Of The Community V. Rights Of The Individual, Further Resistance To The Bail Reform Act
- United States v. Place - Significance, Impact, Unabomber Caught
- United States v. Ross - Further Readings
- United States v. Ross - Significance
- Other Free Encyclopedias