State v. Burroughs

2022-Ohio-2146 (Ohio 2022) · Supreme Court of Ohio · June 28, 2022 · No. 2020-1304

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio held that the single-purpose-container exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement did not authorize police to search a closed bookbag found in a home during an arrest. Because the bookbag was not a container whose contents were apparent from its distinctive characteristics and no exigent circumstances existed, the officers were required to obtain a warrant. The court reversed the appellate judgment, vacated the conviction, and remanded with instructions to suppress the evidence.

Holdings

  1. A warrantless search of a closed container ordinarily violates the Fourth Amendment unless a specific exception to the warrant requirement applies; probable cause alone does not justify opening the container absent exigent circumstances.
  2. The single-purpose-container exception applies only when a container's distinctive configuration, transparency, or other characteristics make its illegal contents readily apparent, effectively placing those contents in plain view. A common bookbag is not a single-purpose drug container, and the visible portion of an empty baggie did not make its contents obvious.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the warrantless search of a closed bookbag inside a home was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
  2. Whether the single-purpose-container exception to the warrant requirement applied because part of a plastic baggie was visible in the bookbag's zipper.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (12)

  • Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373, 382, 134 S.Ct. 2473, 189 L.Ed.2d 430 (2014)(followed)
  • Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 14, 68 S.Ct. 367, 92 L.Ed. 436 (1948)(followed)
  • Arkansas v. Sanders, 442 U.S. 753, 755, 764 n.13, 766, 99 S.Ct. 2586, 61 L.Ed.2d 235 (1979)(abrogated_on_other_grounds)
  • California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565, 111 S.Ct. 1982, 114 L.Ed.2d 619 (1991)(abrogated)
  • Robbins v. California, 453 U.S. 420, 427-429, 101 S.Ct. 2841, 69 L.Ed.2d 744 (1981)(followed)
  • United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 824, 102 S.Ct. 2157, 72 L.Ed.2d 572 (1982)(abrogating)
  • Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128, 133, 136-137, 110 S.Ct. 2301, 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990)(followed)
  • United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 701-702, 103 S.Ct. 2637, 77 L.Ed.2d 110 (1983)(followed)
  • Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730, 747, 103 S.Ct. 1535, 75 L.Ed.2d 502 (1983) (Stevens, J., concurring in the judgment)(followed)
  • United States v. Gust, 405 F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2005)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 12.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…