United States v. Cooley
United States Supreme Court
141 S. Ct. 1638 (2021)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
During a regular patrol, Officer James Saylor, a member of the Crow Reservation Police, spotted Joshua Cooley’s (defendant) truck stopped on the side of United States Highway 212 (US 212). US 212 was a public right-of-way that crossed the Crow Reservation. Saylor spoke to Cooley, noticed that Cooley’s eyes were bloodshot, and saw two semiautomatic rifles on the front passenger seat. Saylor ordered Cooley out of the truck and patted him down. Saylor then immediately called both tribal and county police officers for backup. Before the other officers arrived, Saylor investigated the truck and found methamphetamine in plain view. Federal officers arrived and ordered Saylor to seize all contraband in plain view. Cooley was taken to the Crow Police Department and interrogated by both local and federal officers. A federal grand jury subsequently indicted Cooley on gun and drug charges. Cooley moved to suppress the drug evidence Saylor had seized. The district court granted Saylor’s motion, holding that Saylor, as a tribal police officer, did not have the authority to investigate a non-Indian for nonapparent violations of state and federal law on a public right-of-way crossing the Crow Reservation. The United States (government) (plaintiff) appealed, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. The government appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Breyer, J.)
Concurrence (Alito, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.