Bond v. United States
United States Supreme Court
529 U.S. 334, 120 S.Ct. 1462, 146 L.Ed.2d 365 (2000)
- Written by Matthew Kay, JD
Facts
Agent Cantu, having boarded a bus, started to squeeze the soft luggage in the overhead bins because he was searching for drugs on board. In the overhead bin at the back of the bus, where Bond (defendant) was seated, Cantu felt a green canvas bag and noticed that it contained a “brick-like” object. Bond said that the bag was his and allowed Cantu to search it. Cantu discovered, wrapped in duct tape, in an oval shape, a certain amount of methamphetamine, which was rolled up in a pair of pants. Bond moved to suppress the evidence, but the motion was denied and he was convicted. On appeal, Bond argued that the search was illegal. He claimed that although the bag was open to the public, Cantu had manipulated the bag in a way that the other passengers would not have. The court of appeals said that Cantu’s manipulation of the bag was intended to detect drugs and was irrelevant for the Fourth Amendment analysis. The court held that the manipulation of Bond’s bag was not a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, C.J.)
Dissent (Breyer, J.,)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.