Chimel v. California
Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969), was a 1969 United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that police officers arresting a person at his home could not search the entire home without a search warrant, but that police may search the area within immediate reach of the person without a warrant. The rule on searches incident to a lawful arrest within the home is now known as the Chimel rule.
| Chimel v. California | |
|---|---|
| Argued March 27, 1969 Decided June 23, 1969 | |
| Full case name | Ted Chimel v. State of California |
| Citations | 395 U.S. 752 (more) 89 S. Ct. 2034; 23 L. Ed. 2d 685; 1959 U.S. LEXIS 1166 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Conviction affirmed, People v. Chimel, 61 Cal. Rptr. 714 (Ct. App. 1967); affirmed, 68 Cal. 2d 436, 439 P.2d 333 (1968); cert. granted, 393 U.S. 958 (1968). |
| Subsequent | Rehearing denied, 396 U.S. 869 (1969). |
| Holding | |
| An arresting officer may search only the area "within the immediate control" of the person arrested, meaning the area from which he might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence. Any other search of the surrounding area requires a search warrant. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Stewart, joined by Warren, Douglas, Harlan, Brennan, Marshall |
| Concurrence | Harlan |
| Dissent | White, joined by Black |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. IV U.S. Const. amend. XIV | |
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Ronald M. George, the young deputy attorney general who unsuccessfully argued California's case, ultimately became chief justice of the Supreme Court of California.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.