Home › Case briefs › Criminal Procedure

Chimel v. California

Supreme Court of the United States · 1969 · Criminal Procedure

Criminal ProcedureFourth Amendmentsearch incident to arrestscopewingspan ruleFourth Amendmentsearch incident to arrestimmediate control

Facts

Three police officers came to the petitioner's home with an arrest warrant for burglary, entered the house with the wife's permission, and arrested the petitioner when he returned home. After the petitioner refused consent to a search, the officers said they would search based on the lawful arrest, even though they had no search warrant. The officers then searched the entire three-bedroom house, including the attic, garage, and workshop, and in some rooms had the wife open drawers and move contents so they could inspect them. The search lasted 45 minutes to an hour, and officers seized numerous coins and other items later introduced at trial.

Issue

When officers make a lawful arrest inside a home, may they, without a search warrant, search the entire house as a search incident to arrest? Or is such a search limited to the arrestee's person and the area within his immediate control?

Rule

Incident to a lawful arrest, officers may search the arrestee's person and the area within his immediate control, meaning the area from within which he might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence. Absent another well-recognized exception, officers may not, without a search warrant, search other rooms or closed or concealed areas beyond that reach.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Officers in Phoenix lawfully arrest Nolan Price in his apartment living room on a fraud charge. Immediately after handcuffing him, they pat down his jacket and remove a folded note from his shirt pocket that appears to list account numbers.

Is the seizure of the note most likely valid as a search incident to arrest?

Explanation. A lawful arrest permits a warrantless search of the arrestee's person. The majority grounded that authority in officer safety and in preventing concealment or destruction of evidence. That justification allows officers to remove not only weapons but also evidentiary items found on the person. (Derived from Chimel v. California (1969).)