United States Supreme Court
501 U.S. 429 (1991)
Bostick (defendant) was riding a bus when two uniformed sheriff’s officers boarded. The officers singled out Bostick and asked him for identification. The officers told Bostick that they were narcotics agents searching for drugs and asked to search his luggage. The officers informed Bostick that he had a right to refuse to consent to the search. Bostick consented to the search and the officers discovered drugs in his luggage. Bostick appealed a trial court judgment and the state supreme court concluded that the officers had engaged in an unreasonable seizure that violated Bostick’s constitutional rights. The state court further held that the unconstitutional seizure negated Bostick’s consent to the search of his luggage. The state of Florida (plaintiff) petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (O’Connor, J.)
Dissent (Marshall, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 240,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 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.