Smith v. Ohio

Background

On a June evening a man carrying a brown grocery bag left a private home with a companion and walked into a YMCA parking lot. Two plainclothes police officers in an unmarked car approached. One officer asked him to come over; when the officer identified himself the man tossed the bag onto his car and turned. The officer pushed the man's hand away, opened the bag, and found drug paraphernalia that led to the man's arrest and conviction for drug abuse.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether a warrantless search that creates probable cause can be treated as a lawful search incident to an arrest when the search happens before the arrest. The Court said no. It explained that searches incident to arrest are limited to searches after a lawful arrest and areas within the arrested person's immediate control. Allowing a search first and an arrest later would let officers search anyone without a warrant simply because an arrest follows, which the Court rejected. The State's alternate argument that the man had abandoned the bag was rejected by the Ohio Supreme Court, and the high Court declined to disturb that conclusion.

Real world impact

The decision makes it harder for police to open closed personal containers before arrest without a warrant, protecting people who try to shield their property. The ruling reverses the Ohio court's result and suppresses that ground for the man's conviction in this case. The reversal was done summarily, not through a full long-form opinion, so the practical rule could be shaped further in later cases.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Marshall agreed the state court likely erred but dissented from the Court's summary reversal, warning that such short disposals deny parties a full hearing and raise the risk of error.