Today the Supreme Court of the United States decided Navarette v. California. The issue was whether the Fourth Amendment requires an officer who receives an anonymous tip regarding a drunken or reckless driver to corroborate dangerous driving before stopping the vehicle. In a 5-4 decision, with Justice Thomas writing for the majority (joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Breyer, and Alito) , the Court held that the stop complied with the Fourth Amendment because, under a totality of the circumstances, the officer had reasonable suspicion that the driver was intoxicated. Justice Scalia wrote the dissent (joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan) and stated, “The Court’s opinion serves up a freedom-destroying cocktail consisting of two parts patent falsity: (1) that anonymous 911 reports of traffic violations are reliable so long as they correctly identify a car and its location, and (2) that a single instance of careless or reckless driving necessarily supports a reasonable suspicion of drunkenness. ... After today’s opinion all of us on the road, and not just drug dealers, are at risk of having our freedom of movement curtailed on suspicion of drunkenness, based upon a phone tip, true or false, of a single instance of careless driving. ”
Posted on: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 18:31:47 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015