Английская Википедия:Bond v. United States (2000)

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:For Шаблон:Use mdy dates Шаблон:Infobox SCOTUS case

Bond v United States, 529 U.S. 334 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court Fourth Amendment case that applied the ruling of Minnesota v. Dickerson to luggage, which held that police may not physically manipulate items without a warrant without violating the Fourth Amendment.[1]

Background

During an immigration status check of a passenger on a bus in Texas, a United States Border Patrol Agent squeezed the soft luggage of Steven D Bond.[2] The Agent thought the bag held a "brick-like" object.[3] After Bond admitted that it was his bag and then consented to a search of the bag, the Border Patrol Agent found a "brick" of methamphetamine.[4] Bond was arrested and indicted on Federal drug charges.[3] Bond moved to suppress the "brick" of methamphetamine on the basis that the agent had conducted an illegal search of the bag when squeezing it.[3] He claimed that this was a violation of the Federal Constitution's Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures.[3] The district court denied the motion, and found Bond guilty.[3] The Court of Appeals held that the agent's manipulation of the bag was not a search under the Fourth Amendment.[3]

Opinion of the Court

In a 7-2 opinion written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the Court held that Agent Cantu's physical manipulation of Bond's bag violated the Fourth Amendment."[5]

References

Шаблон:Reflist

External links

Шаблон:US4thAmendment

  1. Bond v. United States, Шаблон:Ussc.
  2. Bond, 529 U.S. at 335.
  3. 3,0 3,1 3,2 3,3 3,4 3,5 Bond, 529 U.S. at 336.
  4. Bond, 529 U.S. at 336. In a footnote, the Court noted that "[t]he Government has not argued here that petitioner's consent to Agent Cantu's opening the bag is a basis for admitting the evidence." Bond, 529 U.S. at 336, n.1.
  5. Bond, 529 U.S. at 339.