法律英語(yǔ)導(dǎo)讀(44)

    Section V: Warrantless Searches That Are Incident to Arrest

　　This section deals with warrantless searches that are considered valid because they were made in the course of making a valid arrest.

　　31. Can an Officer Legally Search Me After Arresting Me?

　　Yes. Police officers do not need a warrant to make a search "incident to an arrest." After an arrest, police officers have the right to protect themselves by searching for weapons and to protect the legal case against the suspect by searching for evidence that the suspect might try to destroy. Assuming that the officer has probable cause to make the arrest in the first place, a search of the person and the person’s surroundings following the arrest is valid, and any evidence uncovered is admissible at trial.

　　32. If I’m Arrested on the Street or in a Shopping Mall, Can the Arresting Officer Search My Dwelling or Car?

　　No. To justify a search as incident to an arrest, a spatial relationship must exist between the arrest and the search. The general rule is that after arrest the police may search a defendant and the area within a defendant’s immediate control. （Chimel v. California, U.S. Sup. Ct. 1969.） For example, an arresting officer may search not only a suspect’s clothes, but also a suspect’s wallet or purse. If an arrest takes place in a kitchen, the arresting officer can probably search the kitchen, but not the rest of the house. If an arrest takes place outside a house, the arresting officer cannot search the house at all. To conduct a search broader in scope than a defendant and the area within the defendant’s immediate control, an officer would have to obtain a warrant.

　　Case Example: Officer Montoya arrests Sarah Adams for driving under the influence of illegal drugs. Before taking Sarah to jail, Officer Montoya takes Sarah’s key and enters her apartment. Inside, Officer Montoya finds a number of computers that turn out—after a check of their serial numbers—to have been stolen. Officer Montoya seizes the computers as evidence and adds possession of stolen property to the charges against Sarah.

　　Question: Are the computers admissible in evidence?

　　Answer: No. The officer should have obtained a search warrant before entering Sarah’s apartment. Since Officer Montoya had no right to be inside the house in the first place, it doesn’t matter that the computers were in plain view once the officer was inside.

　　Don’t Go Back in the House

　　When the police arrest suspects outside their residences and have no basis for making a protective sweep, officers may try to expand the scope of a permissible search by offering to let suspects go inside to get a change of clothes, feed a pet, etc. before taking the suspect to jail. While accompanying the suspect inside the residence, officers can seize whatever may be in plain view （for instance, drugs）. Thus, suspects may wisely refuse an invitation by the arresting officers to let the suspect enter the residence, and instead rely on their friends if they need clothes or pet feeding.