The Supreme Court yesterday issued a decision which restricts the long-standing right of law enforcement to search a suspect’s car after making an arrest.  In Arizona v. Gant, the suspect was arrested for driving with a suspended license, handcuffed and placed in the back of a patrol car.  Several officers arrived at the scene and cocaine was discovered during a search of Gant’s vehicle conducted secondary to his arrest on the suspended license charge.  The Supreme Court upheld the suppression of the cocaine and held that a search of the car could only be justified where (1) the suspect could still reach for a weapon or destroy evidence or (2) there is “reason to believe” there is evidence in the car on the offense for which the subject was arrested. 

The decision is obviously troubling to law enforcement officers.  While the right to search the vehicle seems to remain where the suspect remains in an area where he or she can lunge to reach a weapon or destroy evidence, the right is eliminated once the suspect is restrained and/or moved away from the vehicle.  We are particularly concerned that the decision might compel an officer to leave a suspect without handcuffs, in (or near) the vehicle in order to justify a search when the prudent course for his or her own safety would be to handcuff the suspect and place him or her into the cruiser.

While the decision certainly makes a police officer’s job even more difficult, in the long run it hopefully will not be as troubling as it appears at first glance.  The decision does not appear to  disturb other exceptions to the warrant requirement which have been applied to vehicle searches such as consent, exigent, vehicle “frisk” and inventory searches.  In the weeks to come we will continue to review and evaluate the decision and issue updates as necessary.