ÿWPCË/ Ç5Ñ8t#ò£þF‰Øe&WÀÝ®¦ù6£.V8Ó"‚EO±¿#¿áë_•ïš*[¨„5+áyHÇ;nŽ-‘|ñþ råáÍŠ¸ùŠz!%þÆÔØc, NíµíÀÕ•+ÈUr8½¶Û_;0³“‹ /€©È}lÕÒ´#¥yfÖ‡×eÁ1ØVçÙg8bj!TÑ.%ÅåÌA°«þa9äÒ•ohøˆ”(ü€ý™Ríîòä¡5`=4µVôà´Ã™Áºã8KxØÖRláí %ïew ¤ÈÇÁ*íG!¯?K\½@@²¤XYû-Wu“Øcw¦ušè%æò=cX÷üÅ’? §Ohãë,ä-ó+EMù¦NNþ³B¨'—{T…ÑÛ ·mÄÞ ÃiŸ}õaSÆóU# ‰¢¿²Ôdöw <¢ü¶?ÈE¨½Ú‚ÕåÔ¢v‹7KÎ'E áïDx÷šVÝØóᢵžnºf–ƒtkb¯ qõíÇLFC¬Êµ^£kGÂ:"Kôê–4:*”ùšC3ë$d‘dch_-)è¨éâ…js.i¨ê£Fkú`e-áÚËÉêÍSí}?x”Y ç•ë®ùžƒÖ'¬y/m9öõ½â5D›'à V#É´U N} %Ë 0:Ñ 0U ^ ` U8l U ,¤ wÐ 4Ô è ÷ mù È 0ÝØ 0¿µ 0¹t 0³- 0­à 0§ 0¡4 0›Õ 0¿p 0Ë/ 0­ú 0§§ 0¡N 0›ï 0•Š 0 0‡® 0¼5 0Èñ 0ª¹ 0¤c 0ž 0˜¥ 0’= 0ŒÏ 0„[Nßµá–% 0~ž& 0D'A`'Á¡)Fb+·¨,_-_-U=@n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/n/ B®/˜HP LaserJet 2200 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô*+ ÿÿ(_26Ô2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àʳk>– 7yL –AZ‹ Arial Black ,O²ÀAZ‹Arial »‚h>ø3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ SouterMarron opnDecisisBreyerAlitoBelton LagoMcKayAtwaterarrestee S.CtChimelRabinowitzwarrantlessSupergoldMcCaneKrullBranner t]hearresteesRuckesChadwick Rptr*D+D ÿÿ(_25Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó*5+5 ÿÿ(_24Ó  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÓ  Ó*2+2 ÿÿ(_23Ó ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÓ ` Ó*/+/ ÿÿ(_22Ó ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÓ ¸ Ó*,+, ÿÿ(_21Ó  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÓ  Ó*)+) ÿÿ(_20Ó h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓDDœôL¤ÓÓ h Ó*&+& ÿÿ(_19Ó À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓœœôL¤ÓÓ À Ó*#+# ÿÿ(_18Ó  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ ôôL¤ÓÓ  Ó*>> ÿÿ(_17Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ  Ó*DD ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó*55 ÿÿ(_15Ó  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÓ  Ó*22 ÿÿ(_14Ó ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÓ ` Ó*// ÿÿ(_13Ó ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÓ ¸ Ó*,, ÿÿ(_12Ó  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó ììDœôL¤ ÓÓ  Ó*)) ÿÿ(_11Ó h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓDDœôL¤ÓÓ h Ó*&& ÿÿ(_10Ó À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€ÓœœôL¤ÓÓ À Ó(## ÿÿ&_9Ó  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó ôôL¤ÓÓ  Ó(>> ÿÿ&_8Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ  Ó(DD ÿÿ&_7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÓ ¨ý ÓÓ ° Ó(55 ÿÿ&_6Ó  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÓ  Ó(22 ÿÿ&_5Ó ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÓ ` Ó(// ÿÿ&_4Ó ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÓ ¸ Ó(,, ÿÿ&_3Ó  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÓ  Ó()) ÿÿ&_2Ó h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓDDœôL¤ÓÓ h Ó(&& ÿÿ&_1Ó À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓœœôL¤ÓÓ À Ó&## ÿÿ$_Ó  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ ôôL¤ÓÓ  Ó «Ý ƒ,Ä($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Ô‡4Xð<XXXÔÔ‡4Š-žˆX4Xð<ÔIn€òòAtwateróó,€the€Supreme€Court€upheld€the€constitutionality€of€the€custodial€arrestÐ ° Ðof€a€Texas€woman€who€had€committed€a€seatbelt€violation,€punishable€by€only€a€monetaryÐ ° Ðfine.€Under€Texas€law,€officers€had€the€option€of€arresting€the€driver€or€issuing€a€citationÐ ° Ðfor€her€failure€to€secure€her€passengers€in€seatbelts.€The€Court€held€that€Atwaterððs€arrestÐ ° Ðdid€not€violate€the€Constitutionððs€proscription€on€unreasonable€searches€and€seizures:€ð ðIfÐ ° Ðan€officer€has€probable€cause€to€believe€that€an€individual€has€committed€even€a€minorÐ °  Ðcriminal€offense€in€his€presence,€he€may,€without€violating€the€Fourth€Amendment,€arrestÐ °  Ðthe€offender.ðð€(òòAtwater,€supraóó.,€532€U.S.€at€354.)€Unlike€Texas,€California€statutes€do€notÐ °  Ðauthorize€a€custodial€arrest€for€a€seatbelt€violation€or€other€minor€Vehicle€Code€offensesÐ °  Ð(including€the€fine„only€infraction€of€driving€a€bicycle€on€the€wrong€side€of€the€roadway).Ð °  ÐNevertheless,€in€òòPeople€v.€McKayóó,€the€California€Supreme€Court€held€that€a€custodialÐ °  Ðarrest€for€a€minor€traffic€offense€does€not€violate€the€Fourth€Amendment,€even€though€itÐ °  Ðis€illegal€under€California€law.€Thus,€if€an€officer€effects€a€custodial€arrest€of€anÐ °  Ðindividual€for€a€minor€Vehicle€Code€offense,€in€violation€of€state€statutory€procedures,Ð °  Ðand€then€searches€his€vehicle€incident€to€arrest,€any€evidence€seized€is€not€subject€toÐ ° Ðsuppression.€(òòMcKay,€supraóó.,€27€Cal.€4òòthóó€at€607„619.)Ô#†Š-žˆˆ4Š-žf#ÔÔ#†Xð<XˆŠ-ž…#Ô þÝ ƒ,Ä($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àÔ€Š-žˆXXÔNote€that€under€the€òòGantóó€analysis,€the€court€would€have€reached€the€sameÐ ° Ðconclusion.(.(3Ä($¤¤Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó 7Ý ƒ,Ä($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àÔ€XîüXXXÔÔ‡4Xð<XXXîüÔÔ€4Š-žˆX4Xð<ÔIÔ‡4Xð<Xˆ4Š-žÔn€òòThorntonóó,€the€defendant€was€handcuffed€and€seated€in€the€police€car€by€theÐ ° Ðtime€of€the€search,€but€officers€could€have€reasonably€believed€that€evidence€of€his€drug€dealingÐ ° Ðoffense€would€be€found€in€the€vehicle.Ô#†XîüXX4Xð<#ÔÔ#†Šá6ˆXXîüÏ#Ô ·Ý ƒ,Ä($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àÔ€XîüXXXÔÔ€Šá6ˆXXîüÔÔ‡4Š-žˆˆŠá6ÔJustice€Breyer€filed€a€separate€dissenting€opinion,€joining€all€but€the€lastÐ ° Ðpart€of€Justice€Alitoððs€dissent.Ô‡4Xð<Xˆ4Š-žÔÔ#†XîüXX4Xð<¯#ÔÔ#†Šá6ˆXXîüR#Ô <Ý ƒ,Ä($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àÔ€XîüXXXÔÔ€Šá6ˆXXîüÔÔ‡4Š-žˆˆŠá6ÔThis€is€the€portion€of€Alitoððs€dissent€that€Justice€Breyer€did€not€join.Ô#†Šá6ˆˆ4Š-ž¯#Ô ­Ý ƒ,Ä($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€This€published€decision€may€no€longer€be€cited€while€review€is€pending. Ý ƒ,Ä($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà ` àThe€dissenting€justice€would€have€approved€the€search€of€the€key€chain€vial,€takenÐ ° Ðfrom€the€defendantððs€hand€right€before€his€arrest,€as€valid€under€the€authority€of€òòRobinsonóóÐ œì Ð[upholding€the€examination€of€the€contents€of€a€cigarette€pack€that€was€seized€from€theÐ ˆØ Ðdefendantððs€pocket€during€a€search€of€his€person€incident€to€arrest].(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman  dÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€X»îXXXÔÔ€¼»'»XX»îÔÓ  ÓÑ8€ð<XXdìdÈ8ÑÔ‡4¼Hå»»¼»'Ôò òÔ‡4„d „»4¼HåÔòòÑ  ÑFirst€District€Appellate€Project€Ð ° ÐTraining€SeminaróóÔ#†4¼H廄4„d á#ÔÔ‡4Š-žˆ»4¼HåÔÐ ` ÐJanuary€21,€2011Ð pÀ ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÔ#†4¼H廈4Š-ž|#ÔÔ‡4„d „»4¼HåÔÌTHE€EVOLUTION€OF€THE€SEARCH€INCIDENT€TOÐ º  ÐARREST€DOCTRINE:Ð j ÐòòARIZONA€V.€GANT€(2009)€129€S.Ct.€1710Ô#†4¼H廄4„d #ÔÔ‡4Š-žˆ»4¼HåÔóóó óÔ#†ŠªŒˆˆ4Š-ž¿#ÔÐ zÊ ÐÔ‡Šá6ˆˆŠªŒÔÌò òÔ#†ŠªŒˆˆŠá6+#ÔÔ‡4Š-žˆˆŠªŒÔKathryn€Ô_ÔSeligmanÔ_ÔÐ Ì Ðó óò òUpdated€in€January€2011Ô#†4¼H廈4Š-žÎ#ÔÔ‡4Š-žˆ»4¼HåÔÔ#†ŠªŒˆˆ4Š-žq#ÔÔ‡4Š-žˆˆŠªŒÔÐ  Ê ÐØØTHE€EVOLUTION€OF€THE€SEARCH€INCIDENT€TO€ARREST€DOCTRINE:Ô#†4¼H廈4Š-ž#ÔÔ‡4îWäî»4¼HåÔÐ ° ÐòòARIZONA€V.€GANT€(2009)€129€S.Ct.€1710Ô#†4¼Hå»î4îWäû#Ôóóó óÔ#†¼»'»»4¼HåW#ÔÐ ®þ ÐÔ€¼›½»»¼»'ÔÔ€Šá6ˆ»¼›½ÔÌò òÔ€4Š-žˆˆŠá6ÔAnalysis€by€Kathryn€SeligmanÐ Æ ÐStaff€Attorney,€First€District€Appellate€Projectó óÐ Ä Ðò òUpdated€in€January€2011ó óÐ   ÐÌÓ  Óò òó óNote:€This€article€includes€a€thorough€discussion€of€the€justicesðð€reasoning€in€the€threeòòÐ À  ÐArizona€v.€Gantóó€opinions€(majority,€concurrence,€dissent),€as€well€as€a€discussion€of€theÐ À  ÐSupreme€Courtððs€prior€rulings€on€search€incident€to€arrest.€If€you€prefer€to€read€a€briefÐ À   Ðanalysis€of€òòGantóóððs€holding,€the€decisionððs€likely€impact,€the€questions€still€to€beÐ À  Ðaddressed,€and€post„Gant€cases,€€read€only€sections€I,€VI,€VII,€VIII,€and€IX.Ð À  ÐÌòòò òòòÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔI.€Summary:€What€Does€Gant€Hold?Ô#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Hå #Ôóóó óóóÐ À  ÐÌà  àòòArizona€v.€Gantóó€was€decided€by€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€on€April€21,Ð Î Ð2009.€It€was€a€5„4€opinion.€Justice€Stevens€wrote€the€majority€opinion,€and€JusticesÐ Î ÐScalia,€Souter,€Thomas€and€Ginsberg€joined.€Justice€Scalia€filed€a€separate€concurringÐ Î Ðopinion.€Justice€Alito€authored€the€dissent,€joined€by€Chief€Justice€Roberts,€and€JusticesÐ Î ÐKennedy€and€Breyer,€in€part.€Justice€Breyer€wrote€a€separate€dissenting€opinion.à Ð àÐ Î ÐÌà  àTwenty„eight€years€ago,€the€Supreme€Court€decided€òòNew€York€v.€Beltonóó€(1981)Ð Î Ð453€U.S.€454,€holding€that€the€police€could€search€the€entire€passenger€compartment€of€aÐ Î Ðvehicle€incident€to€the€custodial€arrest€of€a€vehicle€occupant.€In€òòGantóó,€the€Court€redefinedÐ Î Ðthe€circumstances€that€justify€a€òòBeltonóó€search,€in€light€of€the€rationales€for€a€ð ðsearchÐ Î Ðincident€to€arrestðð€set€forth€by€the€Court€in€òòChimel€v.€Californiaóó€(1969)€395€U.S.€752.Ð Î ÐÌà  àIn€òòChimelóó,€the€Court€defined€the€scope€of€a€search€conducted€by€the€police€whenÐ Î Ðthey€make€a€custodial€arrest.€In€order€to€protect€the€police€and€prevent€the€destruction€ofÐ Î  Ðevidence,€an€officer€may€search€the€person€arrested€to€remove€any€weapons€or€evidence.Ð Î! ÐAn€officer€may€also€search€the€area€within€the€arresteeððs€immediate€control€ð!ð€the€spaceÐ Î" Ðinto€which€he€might€reach€to€grab€a€weapon€or€evidence.€(òòChimel,€supraóó.,€395€U.S.€atÐ Î# Ð763„764.)€In€òòBeltonóó,€the€Court€considered€the€parameters€of€the€ð ðarea€within€the€arresteeððsÐ Î$  Ðimmediate€controlðð€when€the€arrestee€has€recently€occupied€a€vehicle.€Preferring€aÐ Î%!! Ðstraightforward€rule€to€guide€police€practice,€the€Court€deemed€the€vehicleððs€entireÐ Î&"" Ðpassenger€compartment€to€be€an€area€into€which€the€arrested€occupant€might€reach€toÐ Î'## Ðaccess€a€weapon€or€evidence.€Consequently,€upon€arresting€a€vehicle€occupant,€officersÐ Î($$ Ðmay€search€the€passenger€compartment€and€any€containers€found€therein.€(òòBelton,€supraóó.,Ð Î)%% Ð453€U.S.€at€460.)Ð Î*&& ÐÐ Î+'' Ðà  àò òIn€òòArizona€v.€Gant,€óóthe€Supreme€Courtòò€óóre„examined€the€òòBeltonóó€rule.Ð ° ÐCommensurate€with€the€purposes€of€a€search€incident€to€arrest€ð!ð€to€protect€theÐ ®þ Ðarresting€officers€and€safeguard€evidenceð!ð€the€Court€held€that€ð ðòòBeltonóó€does€notÐ ¬ü Ðauthorize€a€vehicle€search€incident€to€a€recent€occupantððs€arrest€after€the€arresteeÐ ªú Ðhas€been€secured€and€cannot€access€the€interior€of€the€vehicleðð.€Henceforth,€theÐ ¨ø Ðpolice€may€only€search€the€passenger€compartment,€following€the€arrest€of€a€recentÐ ¦ ö Ðoccupant:€1)when€the€arrestee€is€unsecured€and€within€reaching€distance€of€theÐ ¤ ô Ðpassenger€compartment€at€the€time€of€the€search;€or€2)when€it€is€reasonable€toÐ ¢ ò Ðbelieve€that€evidence€relevant€to€the€crime€of€arrest€might€be€found€in€the€vehicle.€Ð   ð Ð(òòGant,€supraóó.,€129€S.Ct.€at€1714.)ó óÐ ž î  ÐÌà  àApplying€this€rule€to€the€facts€of€Gantððs€arrest,€the€Court€held€that€the€search€of€hisÐ œì  Ðvehicle€was€unreasonable.€Police€officers€learned€that€Gant€was€the€subject€of€an€arrestÐ œì  Ðwarrant€for€driving€with€a€suspended€license.€After€observing€Gant€driving,€parking€andÐ œì  Ðalighting€from€a€vehicle,€an€officer€arrested€him€as€he€stood€10€to€12€feet€away€from€hisÐ œì  Ðcar.€After€Gant€was€handcuffed€and€secured€in€the€police€car,€two€officers€searched€theÐ œì Ðcar€heððd€been€driving.€They€found€a€gun€and€a€bag€of€cocaine€in€a€jacket€on€the€backseat.€Ð œì ÐÌà  àThe€United€States€Supreme€Court€agreed€with€the€Arizona€Supreme€Court€that€theÐ œì Ðweapon€and€drugs€found€in€the€vehicle€should€be€suppressed.€At€the€time€of€the€search,Ð œì ÐGant€was€not€within€reaching€distance€of€the€carððs€interior.€Thus,€the€search€of€theÐ œì Ðpassenger€compartment€was€not€necessary€to€prevent€him€from€accessing€a€weapon€orÐ œì Ðdestructible€evidence.€Also,€Mr.€Gant€was€arrested€for€driving€with€a€suspended€license.Ð œì ÐOfficers€could€not€reasonably€expect€to€find€evidence€of€that€crime€inside€his€vehicle.Ð œì Ð(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1714„1716,€1718.)Ð œì ÐÌòòòòò òÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔII.€The€Background€of€the€Search€Incident€to€Arrest€Rules:€Chimel,€Belton€andÐ œì ÐThorntonÔ#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Håc#ÔÐ ªú ÐÌà  àó óóóóóIt€has€long€been€established€that€when€an€individual€is€lawfully€arrested,€the€policeÐ ²! Ðmay€search€the€arrestee€and€seize€items€found€upon€his€person.€(See€òòWeeks€v.€UnitedÐ ²" ÐStatesóó€(1914)€232€U.S.€383,€392;€òòCarroll€v.€United€Statesóó€(1925)€267€U.S.€132,€158.)€ButÐ ²# Ðcould€the€police€search€the€place€of€arrest€without€a€warrant,€and€if€so,€to€what€extent?Ð ²$  ÐOver€the€years,€the€Supreme€Court€issued€several€contradictory€opinions€regarding€policeÐ ²%!! Ðauthority€to€search€the€site€of€the€arrest€when€the€defendant€was€taken€into€custody€at€hisÐ ²&"" Ðhome€or€business.€(See,€e.g.€òòMarron€v.€United€Statesóó€(1927)€275€U.S.€192,€[police€mayÐ ²'## Ðsearch€the€place€of€arrest€for€items€used€to€carry€on€the€defendantððs€criminal€enterprise];Ð ²($$ ÐòòGo„Bart€Importing€Co.€v.€United€Statesóó€(1931)€282€U.S.€344€[unlawfully€searched€theÐ ²)%% Ðarresteeððs€office€and€desk€after€arresting€him€inside€of€his€office];€òòHarris€v.€United€StatesóóÐ ²*&& Ð(1947)€331€U.S.€145€[after€arresting€the€defendant€in€his€living€room,€police€legallyÐ ²+'' Ðsearched€his€entire€four„room€apartment€without€a€warrant];€òòUnited€States€v.€RabinowitzóóÐ ° Ð(1950)€339€U.S.€56€[after€arresting€the€defendant€in€his€one„room€office,€police€wereÐ ° Ðpermitted€to€search€his€desk,€safe€and€file€cabinets].€To€resolve€this€discrepancy,€theÐ ° ÐSupreme€Court€granted€certiorari€in€òòChimel€v.€Californiaóó€(1969)€395€U.S.€752.Ð ° ÐÌà  àòòò òÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔA.€Chimel€v.€California€(1969)€395€U.S.€752Ô#†4Š-žˆ»4¼HåÉ##Ôó óóóÐ °  ÐÌà  àIn€òòChimelóó,€the€police€obtained€a€warrant€authorizing€the€defendantððs€arrest€forÐ ¾  Ðburglarizing€a€coin€shop.€The€officers€executed€the€warrant€and€arrested€the€defendantÐ ¾  Ðinside€his€residence.€The€police€then€searched€the€entire€three„bedroom€house,€includingÐ ¾   Ðthe€attic,€the€garage€and€a€small€workshop.€In€several€rooms,€they€rummaged€throughÐ ¾  Ðdrawers,€looking€for€coins€and€other€items€taken€during€the€burglary.Ð ¾  ÐÌà  àThe€Court€held€that€the€search€of€the€defendantððs€entire€home,€incident€to€hisÐ ¾  Ðlawful€arrest,€was€unconstitutional.€Exigent€circumstances€are€necessary€to€dispense€withÐ ¾ Ðthe€Fourth€Amendmentððs€warrant€requirement,€and€that€the€scope€of€a€warrantless€searchÐ ¾ Ðmust€be€strictly€tied€to€its€justification.€(òòChimel,€supraóó.,€at€761„762.)€ò òWhen€they€make€anÐ ¾ Ðarrest,€police€officers€are€permitted€to€search€for€weapons€that€the€arrestee€mightÐ Â Ðuse€to€resist€or€escape,€and€to€seize€evidence€to€prevent€its€concealment€orÐ À Ðdestruction.€Consequently,€the€police€may€contemporaneously€search€the€arresteeÐ ¾ Ðand€the€area€into€which€he€might€reach€to€grab€a€weapon€or€evidence.€(òòChimel,Ð ¼  Ðsupraóó.,€at€763.)€ð ðThere€is€no€constitutional€justification,€in€the€absence€of€a€searchÐ º  Ðwarrant,€for€extending€the€search€beyond€that€area.ðð€(òòChimel,€supraóó.,€at€768.)ó ó€Ð ¸ ÐThe€officers€canððt€search€beyond€the€arresteeððs€reach;€they€cannot€search€the€whole€houseÐ ¼  Ðor€the€entire€room€in€which€the€suspect€has€been€arrested.€(òòChimel,€supraóó.,€at€763„764.)€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àThe€òòChimelóó€rule€is€relatively€easy€to€apply€when€a€suspect€is€arrested€in€his€homeÐ ¼  Ðor€office.€But€what€are€the€parameters€of€a€search€incident€to€arrest€when€the€arrestee€is€aÐ ¼  Ðvehicle€occupant?€Courts€considering€this€question€found€no€workable€definition€of€ð ðtheÐ ¼  Ðarea€within€the€immediate€control€of€the€arresteeðð€when€that€area€arguably€included€theÐ ¼!  Ðinterior€of€a€vehicle€that€the€arrestee€had€recently€occupied.€(See€òòNew€York€v.€BeltonóóÐ ¼"  Ð(1981)€453€U.S.€454,€459„460.)€Ð ¼#  ÐÌà  àòòò òÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔB.€New€York€v.€Belton€(1981)€453€U.S.€454Ô#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Hå .#Ôó óóóÐ ¼% !! ÐÌà  àTwelve€years€after€òòChimelóó,€the€Supreme€Court€sought€to€define€the€permissibleÐ Ê'## Ðscope€of€a€search€incident€to€arrest€when€the€police€arrest€a€vehicle€occupant.€(òòBeltonóó,Ð Ê($$ Ðsupra.,€at€455.)€Defendant€Belton€was€a€vehicle€passenger€ð!ð€one€of€four€men€in€anÐ Ê)%% Ðautomobile€stopped€by€the€police€for€speeding.€Upon€contacting€the€driver,€the€officerÐ Ê*&& Ðsmelled€the€odor€of€burnt€marijuana€emanating€from€the€car.€On€the€vehicleððs€floor,€heÐ Ê+'' Ðsaw€an€envelope€marked€ð ðSupergoldðð,€a€term€associated€with€marijuana.€The€defendantÐ ° Ðand€the€other€occupants€were€removed€from€the€car€and€arrested€for€marijuana€possession.Ð ° ÐAfter€searching€the€four€men,€the€officer€searched€the€passenger€compartment€of€the€car.Ð ° ÐOn€the€back€seat,€the€officer€found€a€jacket€that€belonged€to€the€defendant,€and€in€theÐ ° Ðjacketððs€pocket,€he€found€cocaine.€(òòBelton,€supraóó.,€at€455„456.)Ð ° ÐÌà  àThe€Supreme€Court€declared€that€the€searches€of€the€vehicleððs€passengerÐ °  Ðcompartment€and€the€defendantððs€jacket€were€lawful.€The€Court€expressed€its€preferenceÐ °  Ðfor€applying€a€clear€rule€to€a€recurring€factual€situation,€so€that€citizens€may€know€theÐ °  Ðscope€of€their€constitutional€protection€and€law€enforcement€officers€may€know€the€extentÐ °  Ðof€their€authority.€The€Court€generalized€that€ð ðarticles€inside€the€relatively€narrowÐ °  Ðcompass€of€the€passenger€compartment€of€an€automobile€are€in€fact€generally,€even€if€notÐ °  Ðinevitably,€within€ððthe€area€into€which€an€arrestee€might€reach€in€order€to€grab€a€weaponÐ °  Ðor€evidenceðððð.€(òòBelton,€supraóó.,€at€460,€citing€òòChimel,€supraóó.,€395€U.S.€at€763.)Ð °  ÐÌà  àò òAccording€to€òòBeltonóó,€upon€arresting€a€vehicle€occupant,€an€officer€may€searchÐ ° Ðthe€passenger€compartment€and€examine€the€contents€of€any€containers€foundÐ ®þ Ðwithin.€Officers€do€not€have€to€decide€on€a€case„by„case€basis€whether€the€occupantÐ ¬ü Ðcould€have€actually€reached€every€corner€of€the€passenger€compartment€or€theÐ ªú Ðcontainer€searched€when€he€was€in€or€near€the€car.€(òòBelton,€supraóó.,€at€460„461.)ó óÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àIn€òòBeltonóó,€the€Supreme€Courtððs€ostensible€purpose€was€to€provide€aÐ ¦ö Ðstraightforward€rule€to€guide€the€police€when€they€arrested€a€vehicle€occupant.€However,Ð ¦ö Ðas€police€officers€sought€to€apply€the€òòBeltonóó€rule€and€as€the€courts€sought€to€enforce€it,Ð ¦ö Ðthey€faced€many€unanswered€questions.€For€example,€does€òòBeltonóó€sanction€a€search€of€theÐ ¦ö Ðpassenger€compartment€when€the€defendant€exits€the€car€before€the€police€initiate€contact,Ð ¦ö Ðso€that€he€is€outside€of€the€vehicle€at€the€time€of€contact€and€arrest?€Second,€may€theÐ ¦ö Ðpolice€conduct€a€òòBeltonóó€search€when€the€arrestee€is€secured€some€distance€away€from€theÐ ¦ö Ðvehicle€at€the€time€of€the€search,€so€the€threat€that€he€might€grab€a€weapon€or€destructibleÐ ¦ ö Ðevidence€from€the€passenger€compartment€has€been€eradicated?€The€first€of€theseÐ ¦!ö Ðquestions€was€answered€by€the€Supreme€Court€five€years€ago€in€òòThornton€v.€United€StatesóóÐ ¦"ö Ð(2004)€541€U.S.€615,€whereas€the€second€question€was€not€resolved€until€this€yearððsÐ ¦#ö Ðdecision€in€òòArizona€v.€Gantóó.Ð ¦$ö  ÐÐ  ¦%ö ! Ðà  àòòò òÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔC.€Thornton€v.€United€States€(2004)€541€U.S.€615Ô#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Håo=#Ôó óóóÐ ° ÐÌà  àIn€òòThorntonóó,€an€officer€spotted€the€defendantððs€car,€ran€a€check€on€the€license€tagsÐ ¾ Ðand€discovered€that€they€had€been€issued€to€a€different€vehicle.€Before€the€officer€couldÐ ¾ Ðstop€the€defendant,€he€parked€and€left€his€car.€The€officer€exited€from€his€patrol€car,Ð ¾ Ðcontacted€the€defendant,€and€discovered€narcotics€in€his€pockets€during€a€consensual€pat„Ð ¾  Ðsearch.€The€officer€then€arrested€the€defendant€for€drug€possession,€placed€him€in€theÐ ¾  Ðback€of€the€patrol€car,€and€searched€the€passenger€compartment€of€his€vehicle,€finding€aÐ ¾  Ðhandgun€under€the€driverððs€seat.€(òòThornton,€supraóó.,€at€618.)€Ð ¾  ÐÌà  àIn€òòBeltonóó,€the€defendant€was€in€the€passenger€seat€of€the€vehicle€when€the€policeÐ ¾  Ðinitiated€contact,€although€he€was€removed€from€the€car€prior€to€his€arrest.€In€òòThorntonóó,Ð ¾  Ðthe€police€did€not€contact€the€defendant€until€after€he€had€voluntarily€left€his€vehicle.€TheÐ ¾  ÐSupreme€Court€held€that€this€distinction€made€no€difference;€after€arresting€DefendantÐ ¾  ÐThornton,€the€police€were€entitled€to€conduct€a€òòBeltonóó€search€of€the€passengerÐ ¾ Ðcompartment€and€open€any€containers€found€therein.€(òòThornton,€supraóó.,€541€U.S.€at€617.)Ð ¾ ÐÌà  àò òThe€defense€had€asserted€that€officers€could€not€conduct€a€òòBeltonóó€searchÐ ¾ Ðunless€the€suspect€was€inside€the€vehicle€when€the€police€made€contact,€even€if€heÐ ¼  Ðwas€removed€from€the€vehicle€by€the€time€of€the€arrest€and€search.€The€CourtÐ º  Ðrejected€this€rule,€holding€that€ð ðthe€arrest€of€a€suspect€who€is€next€to€a€vehicleÐ ¸ Ðpresents€identical€concerns€regarding€officer€safety€and€the€destruction€of€evidenceÐ ¶ Ðas€the€arrest€of€one€who€is€inside€the€vehicleðð.€€In€either€case,€the€officer€faces€aÐ ´ Ðstressful€and€volatile€situation.€Thus,€a€òòBeltonóó€search€is€authorized€when€the€arresteeÐ ² Ðis€in€the€vehicle€or€has€recently€occupied€the€vehicle€at€the€time€of€police€contact.€Ð ° Ð(òòThorntonóó,€òòsupraóó,€at€623„624.)ó óÐ ®þ ÐÌà  àAs€noted€by€concurring€Justice€Scalia,€òòThorntonóó€left€an€important€questionÐ ¬ü Ðunresolved.€Does€it€matter€that€by€the€time€of€the€car€search,€Defendant€Thornton€ð ðwasÐ ¬ ü Ðneither€in,€nor€anywhere€near,€the€passenger€compartment€of€his€vehicle?€Rather,€he€wasÐ ¬!ü Ðhandcuffed€and€secured€in€the€back€of€the€officerððs€squad€car.ðð€The€risk€that€he€couldÐ ¬"ü Ðactually€grab€a€weapon€or€evidentiary€item€from€the€car€was€extremely€remote,€if€not€non„Ð ¬#ü Ðexistent.€(òòThornton,€supraóó.,€at€625€[conc.€opn.€of€Scalia,€J.].)€Scalia€suggested€that€byÐ ¬$ü  Ðallowing€a€òòBeltonóó€search€under€these€circumstances,€the€Court€had€allowed€the€rule€toÐ ¬%ü ! Ðbecome€unmoored€from€its€justification€(to€protect€officer€safety€and€prevent€evidenceÐ ¬&ü!" Ðdestruction).€Scalia€proposed€an€alternative€rationale€for€a€òòóóvehicle€search€following€anÐ ¬'ü"# Ðarrest€ð!ð€to€search€for€evidence€of€the€crime€of€arrest€that€the€officer€reasonably€believesÐ ¬(ü#$ Ðmight€be€located€in€the€passenger€compartment.€(òòThornton,€supraóó.,€at€625„632.)€It€wouldÐ ¬)ü$% Ðtake€an€additional€five€years,€until€the€Court€would€address€Scaliaððs€concerns€and€hisÐ ¬*ü%& Ðsuggested€alternative€rule.Ð ¬+ü&' ЇÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔòòòòò òIII.€The€Majority€Opinion€in€Arizona€v.€Gant€(2009)€129€S.Ct.€1710Ô#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Hå¦L#Ôó óóóóóÐ ° ÐÌà  àThe€majority€opinion€in€òòGantóó€was€written€by€Justice€Stevens€ð!ð€the€only€SupremeÐ ¾ ÐCourt€Justice€who€was€on€the€Court€when€òòBeltonóó€was€decided.€Stevens€was€joined€byÐ ¾ ÐJustices€Souter,€Thomas,€Ginsberg,€and€Scalia€(who€filed€a€concurring€opinion€explainingÐ ¾ Ðhis€reluctant€support€for€the€majority€position).Ð ¾  ÐÌà  àò òThe€question€presented€in€òòGantóó€was€whether€òòBeltonóó€authorized€a€vehicleÐ ¾  Ðsearch€incident€to€a€recent€occupantððs€arrest€when€the€arrestee€cannot€access€theÐ ¼  Ðvehicleððs€passenger€compartment€at€the€time€of€the€search€ð!ð€e.g.€he€is€handcuffedÐ º  Ðand€secured€in€the€back€seat€of€a€locked€patrol€car.€Ð ¸  ÐÌà  àThe€Court€held€that€a€search€of€the€vehicleððs€passenger€compartment€andÐ ´  Ðcontainers€therein,€incident€to€arrest,€is€justified€in€only€two€situations:€1)when€theÐ ²  Ðarrestee€is€unsecured€and€actually€within€reaching€distance€of€the€passengerÐ ° Ðcompartment€at€the€time€of€the€search;€or€2)when€it€is€reasonable€to€believe€that€theÐ ®þ Ðvehicle€contains€evidence€of€the€offense€of€arrest.€When€these€justifications€areÐ ¬ü Ðabsent,€a€search€of€the€arresteeððs€vehicle€will€be€unreasonable€unless€the€policeÐ ªú Ðobtain€a€warrant€or€demonstrate€that€another€exception€to€the€warrant€requirementÐ ¨ø Ðapplies.€(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1714.)ó óÐ ¦ö ÐÌòòò òà0  àÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔA.€The€Scope€of€a€Search€Incident€to€Arrest€Must€Be€Consistent€With€ItððsÐ ¤ô ÐJustification€as€Set€Forth€in€Chimeló óóóÔ#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Hå©S#Ôв(#(# ÐÌà  àThe€majority€reiterated€that€a€search€incident€to€arrest€is€an€exception€to€the€FourthÐ À ÐAmendmentððs€warrant€requirement.€The€scope€of€this€exception€must€be€commensurateÐ À Ðwith€the€purposes€set€forth€in€òòChimelóó€ð!ð€to€prevent€the€arrestee€from€reaching€for€a€weaponÐ À Ðor€destructible€evidence.€(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1716.)Ð À ÐÌà  àIn€òòBeltonóó,€the€Court€held€that€after€arresting€a€vehicle€occupant,€the€officer€couldÐ À! Ðsearch€the€entire€passenger€compartment.€According€to€òòGantóó,€that€holding€was€based€on:Ð À" Ð1)the€actual€facts€of€òòBeltonóó€(a€lone€officer€arrested€four€suspects€who€stood€just€outsideÐ À# Ðthe€vehicle€at€the€time€of€the€search);€and€2)the€presumption€that€articles€inside€theÐ À$  Ðpassenger€compartment€are€usually€if€not€always€within€the€reach€of€an€arrestee€who€isÐ À%!! Ðinside€or€near€the€vehicle.€Thus,€ð ðòòwhenóó€the€passenger€compartment€is€within€the€arresteeððsÐ À&"" Ðreaching€distance,€òòBeltonóó€supplies€the€generalization€that€the€entire€compartment€and€anyÐ À'## Ðcontainers€therein€may€be€reached.ðð€(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1718.)Ð  À($$ Ðà  àòòò òÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔB.€Rejecting€the€Lower€Courtsðð€Broad€Reading€of€BeltonÔ#†4Š-žˆ»4¼HåÍY#Ôó óóóÐ ° ÐÌà  àAccording€toòò€Gant,óó,€òòBeltonóó€left€open€the€question€of€whether€the€arrestee€must€beÐ ¾ Ðwithin€reaching€distance€of€the€vehicle€to€justify€the€search€of€the€passenger€compartment.Ð ¾ ÐOver€the€next€28€years,€lower€courts€divided€on€this€question,€but€most€understood€òòBeltonóóÐ ¾ Ðas€permitting€a€vehicle€search€òòevery€timeóó€the€police€arrest€a€recent€vehicle€occupantÐ ¾  Ðregardless€of€the€arresteeððs€actual€location€at€the€time€of€the€search€ð!ð€ð ðeven€if€there€[was]Ð ¾  Ðno€possibility€that€the€arrestee€could€gain€access€to€the€vehicle€at€the€time€of€the€search.ððÐ ¾  ÐRelying€on€òòBeltonóó,€courts€have€validated€vehicle€searches€ð ðincident€to€arrestðð€when€theÐ ¾  Ðarrestee€has€been€handcuffed,€secured€in€the€back€of€the€patrol€car€and€even€removedÐ ¾   Ðfrom€the€scene€by€the€time€the€police€enter€the€passenger€compartment.€(òòGant,€supraóó.,€atÐ ¾  Ð1718„1719.)€As€Justice€OððConnor€observed€in€her€òòThorntonóó€concurrenceòòóó,€ð ðlower€courtÐ ¾  Ðdecisions€seem€to€treat€the€ability€to€search€a€vehicle€incident€to€arrest€of€a€recentÐ ¾  Ðoccupant€as€a€police€entitlement€rather€than€as€an€exception€justified€by€the€twinÐ ¾  Ðrationales€of€òòChimelóó.ðð€(òòThornton,€supraóó.,€541€U.S.€at€624€[conc.€opn.€of€OððConnor,€J.].)Ð ¾ ÐÌà  àIn€òòGantóó,€the€Court€rejected€the€ð ðbroad€reading€of€òòBeltonóóðð€which€had€improperlyÐ ¾ Ðauthorized€a€vehicle€search€even€when€the€vehicleððs€passenger€compartment€was€noÐ ¾ Ðlonger€within€the€arresteeððs€reaching€distance.€This€expansive€interpretation€of€the€òòBeltonóóÐ ¾ Ðrule€no€longer€served€the€justifications€underlying€the€ð ðsearch€incident€to€arrestððÐ ¾ Ðexception€defined€in€òòChimelóó.Ð ¾ ÐÌà  àMoreover,€this€broad€reading€of€Belton€undervalued€the€privacy€interests€at€stake.Ð ¾ Ðð ðAlthough€we€have€recognized€that€a€motoristððs€privacy€interest€in€his€vehicle€is€lessÐ ¾ Ðsubstantial€than€in€his€home,€[citation€omitted],€the€former€interest€is€neverthelessÐ ¾ Ðimportant€and€deserving€of€constitutional€protection.€The€privacy€interest€is€particularlyÐ ¾ Ðsignificant€because€ð ðòòBeltonóó€authorizes€police€officers€to€search€not€just€the€passengerÐ ¾ Ðcompartment€but€every€purse,€briefcase,€or€other€container€within€that€space.ðð€ThisÐ ¾ Ðpractice€ð ðimplicates€the€central€concern€underlying€the€Fourth€Amendment€ð!ð€the€concernÐ ¾  Ðabout€giving€police€officers€unbridled€discretion€to€rummage€at€will€among€a€personððsÐ ¾! Ðprivate€effectsðð.€(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1720.)Ð ¾" ÐÌà  àòòÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔò òC.€Comments€on€Stare€DecisisÔ#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Hå f#Ôó óóóÐ ¾$  ÐÌà  àThe€òòGantóó€majority€addressed€the€dissenting€justicesðð€insistence€that€òòstare€decisisóóÐ Ì&"" Ðrequired€adherence€to€the€broad€reading€of€Belton€ð!ð€authorizing€a€vehicle€search€incidentÐ Ì'## Ðto€arrest€in€every€case€regardless€of€the€arresteeððs€location€at€the€time€of€the€search.€First,Ð Ì($$ Ðthe€majority€stated€that€it€was€not€overruling€òòBeltonóó€and€òòThorntonóó,€as€those€cases€areÐ Ì)%% Ðdistinguishable€on€their€facts.€Neither€expressly€permitted€a€search€of€the€vehicleððsÐ Ì*&& Ðpassenger€compartment€when€the€arrestee€was€secured€in€the€patrol€car€òòandóó€the€officersÐ Ì+'' Ðlacked€a€reasonable€belief€that€evidence€of€the€crime€of€arrest€could€be€found€in€the€car.׃.×Ý ƒ-#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ° Ð(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1722.)€Ð ° ÐÌà  àSecond,€reliance€on€òòstare€decisisóó€cannot€ð ðjustify€the€continuance€of€anÐ ° Ðunconstitutional€police€practiceðð€or€application€of€a€rule€untethered€from€its€rationale:Ð ° ÐÌà  àà ` àð ðThe€experience€of€28€years€since€we€decided€òòBeltonóó€hasÐ °  Ðà  àà ` àshown€that€the€generalization€underpinning€the€broadÐ °  Ðà  à€€€€€€€€€€€reading€of€that€opinion€is€unfounded.€We€know€thatÐ °  Ðà  àà ` àarticles€inside€the€passenger€compartment€are€rarely€ððwithinÐ °  Ðà  àà ` àthe€area€into€which€an€arrestee€might€reachðð,€and€blindÐ °  Ðà  àà ` àadherence€to€òòBeltonóóððs€faulty€assumption€would€authorizeÐ °  Ðà  àà ` àmyriad€unconstitutional€searches.ðð€(òòGant,€supraóó.,at€1723.)€Ð °  ÐÌà  àThird,€The€fact€that€law€enforcement€officers€relied€on€the€broad€interpretation€ofÐ ° ÐòòBeltonóó€in€conducting€vehicle€searches€for€28€years€does€not€require€a€different€outcome:Ð ° ÐÌà  àà ` àð ðCountless€individuals€guilty€of€nothing€more€serious€than€aÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àtraffic€violation€have€had€their€constitutional€right€to€the€Ð ° Ðà  àà ` àsecurity€of€their€private€effects€violated€as€a€result.€The€factÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àthat€the€law€enforcement€community€may€view€the€StateððsÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àversion€of€the€òòBeltonóó€rule€as€an€entitlement€does€notÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àestablish€the€sort€of€reliance€interest€that€could€outweighÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àthe€countervailing€interest€that€all€individuals€share€in€havingÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àtheir€constitutional€rights€fully€protected.ðð€Ð ° Ðà  àà ` à(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1722„1723.)Ð ° ÐÌà0  àòòò òÔ‡4¼H廈4Š-žÔD.€Adopting€Justice€Scaliaððs€Proposed€Rule€Permitting€a€BeltonÐ ° ÐEvidentiary€SearchÔ#†4Š-žˆ»4¼Hå¤r#Ôó óóóо (#(# ÐÌà  àAcknowledging€that€it€did€not€follow€from€òòChimelóó,€the€òòGantóó€majority€held€that€theÐ Ì" Ðsearch€of€the€vehicleððs€passenger€compartment,€incident€to€a€recent€occupantððs€arrest,Ð Ì# Ðwould€also€be€allowed€when€officers€reasonably€believe€that€evidence€relevant€to€theÐ Ì$  Ðcrime€of€arrest€might€be€found€in€the€vehicle.€(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1719.)€This€novel€rule€wasÐ Ì%!! Ðadvocated€by€Justice€Scalia€in€his€concurring€opinion€in€òòThorntonóó,€as€well€as€in€hisÐ Ì&"" Ðconcurrence€in€the€present€case.Ð ° ÐÌà  àUnder€this€ð ðScalia€ruleðð,€authority€to€search€the€passenger€compartment€dependsÐ ° Ðon€the€crime€for€which€the€suspect€has€been€arrested.€If€he€is€arrested€for€a€drug€offenseÐ ° Ð(as€were€the€defendants€in€òòBeltonóó€and€òòThorntonóó),€the€police€can€search€the€vehicle€forÐ ° Ðevidence€of€this€crime.€If€he€is€arrested€for€a€traffic€violation€(as€was€the€defendant€inÐ °  ÐòòGantóó),€the€officers€cannot€search€as€it€would€be€unreasonable€to€believe€that€relevantÐ °  Ðevidence€would€be€found€in€the€passenger€compartment.€(òòGant,€supraóó.,€at€1719.)Ð °  ÐÌà  àThe€Court€reconciled€this€new€justification€for€a€vehicle€search€with€its€previousÐ °  Ðruling€in€òòUnited€States€v.€Rossóó€(1982)€456€U.S.€798.Ó<(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤°œX<ÓÔ‡4Xð<Xˆ4Š-žÔ€Ô#†4Š-žˆX4Xð