Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

United States v. Knotts

United States Supreme Court
460 U.S. 276 (1983)


Facts

Chemical manufacturer 3M Company informed a Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension narcotics officer that Tristan Armstrong (defendant) was stealing chemicals used to make drugs. Police began investigating Armstrong and learned that he purchased additional chemicals from Hawkins (Hawkins) Chemical Company and delivered them to Darryl Petschen (defendant). Hawkins allowed police to place a transmitter called a beeper inside a container of chloroform, which they gave to Armstrong during his next purchase. Using the beeper and visual surveillance, police followed the container to Knotts’ (defendant) cabin in Wisconsin. Over the next three days, the police gathered enough evidence to obtain a search warrant. Inside the cabin, they found a fully stocked drug laboratory. The defendants were charged with conspiracy to manufacture controlled substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1976) and brought before the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Armstrong pled guilty and testified against Knotts and Petschen at trial. Knotts filed a motion to suppress on the grounds that the use of the beeper without a warrant violated the Fourth Amendment. The motion was denied, and Knotts was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Stevens, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. 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.

  2. 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 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.