United States v. Drayton

Supreme Court of the United States · 2002 · Criminal Procedure

536 U.S. 194 (2002)

Updated July 27, 2026

Criminal ProcedureFourth Amendmentbus interdictionconsensual encounterseizureconsent searchreasonable personfree to refuse

Facts

During a scheduled bus stop, three plainclothes Tallahassee police officers boarded a Greyhound bus as part of a routine drug and weapons interdiction effort. One officer stood at the front without blocking the aisle or exit, while Officer Lang questioned passengers individually in a polite, quiet voice and asked respondents about their luggage and then for permission to search their bag and persons; he did not advise them that they could refuse. Brown said "Go ahead" to the bag search and "Sure" to a patdown, and Drayton later responded to Lang's request to search by lifting his hands from his legs. The patdowns revealed hard objects later found to be taped bundles of cocaine.

Issue

Whether police officers conducting suspicionless questioning on a bus seize passengers within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when they do not advise passengers of their right to refuse cooperation. Whether, under the circumstances here, respondents' consent to the searches of their luggage and persons was voluntary despite the absence of such a warning.

Rule

Police officers may approach bus passengers at random, ask questions, and request consent to search so long as a reasonable person would feel free to decline the officers' requests or otherwise terminate the encounter. The Fourth Amendment does not require officers to advise passengers of their right not to cooperate or to refuse consent, though knowledge of the right to refuse is one factor in the totality-of-the-circumstances analysis of voluntariness.

🔒

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.

During a scheduled stop in Albuquerque, two plainclothes officers board a regional bus with the driver's permission. One officer stands near the front but leaves the aisle and exit open, while the other quietly approaches Maya Ortiz, shows a badge briefly, and asks whether she has any luggage and whether he may search it; he does not say she can refuse.

Which is the strongest argument that no seizure occurred before the luggage search?

Explanation. The governing inquiry is whether, under all the circumstances, a reasonable person would feel free to decline the officers' requests or otherwise terminate the encounter. Bus questioning is not exempt from the Fourth Amendment, but it is not a seizure when officers ask questions and request consent without coercive means. The absence of an express warning is not dispositive and does not create a per se rule either way.