From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oklahoma v. Castleberry

U.S.
Apr 1, 1985
471 U.S. 146 (1985)

Summary

In Castleberry, we affirmed by an equally divided court. That result illustrates this Court's continued struggle with the scope of the automobile exception, rather than the absence of confusion in applying it.

Summary of this case from California v. Acevedo

Opinion

CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA

No. 83-2126.

Argued March 20, 1985 Decided April 1, 1985

678 P.2d 720, affirmed by an equally divided Court.

David W. Lee, Assistant Attorney General of Oklahoma, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Michael C. Turpen, Attorney General, and Hugh A. Manning, Assistant Attorney General.

Charles Foster Cox argued the cause and filed a brief for respondents.

Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the State of California by John K. Van de Kamp, Attorney General, Robert R. Granucci, Assistant Attorney General, and Clifford K. Thompson, Jr., and Ronald E. Niver, Deputy Attorneys General; and for Americans for Effective Law Enforcement, Inc., et al. by Fred E. Inbau, Wayne W. Schmidt, James P. Manak, David Crump, and Daniel B. Hales.


The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

JUSTICE POWELL took no part in the decision of this case.


Summaries of

Oklahoma v. Castleberry

U.S.
Apr 1, 1985
471 U.S. 146 (1985)

In Castleberry, we affirmed by an equally divided court. That result illustrates this Court's continued struggle with the scope of the automobile exception, rather than the absence of confusion in applying it.

Summary of this case from California v. Acevedo

In Oklahoma v. Castleberry, 471 U.S. 146 (1985), police officers had probable cause to believe the defendant carried narcotics in blue suitcases in the trunk of his car.

Summary of this case from California v. Acevedo
Case details for

Oklahoma v. Castleberry

Case Details

Full title:OKLAHOMA v . CASTLEBERRY ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: Apr 1, 1985

Citations

471 U.S. 146 (1985)

Citing Cases

California v. Acevedo

The Chadwick-Sanders rule also is the antithesis of a clear and unequivocal guideline and, thus, has confused…

United States v. Salazar

United States v. Chadwick, 433 U.S. 1, 97 S.Ct. 2476, 53 L.Ed.2d 538 (1977); see Ross, 456, U.S. at 813, 102…