CAN POLICE SEARCH MY CAR WITHOUT A WARRANT?

The answer is they can if the search falls under the “automobile exception” to the warrant requirement.

Because a driver could easily take off  before police have time to get a warrant, police are allowed to search your car if there is probable cause to believe that your car contains evidence of criminal activity. To establish probable cause, the totality of the facts  known to the officer at the time of the search must justify a reasonable person in believing that the automobile contained evidence of criminal activity.

The scope of  the search  is defined by the object of the search and the places in which there is probable cause to believe it may be found. For that reason, the search may include any interior compartment  that might reasonably contain the contraband.  By the same token, an officer cannot look where an object cannot reasonably be found.  For instance, an officer searching for a gun cannot look in a pill box.

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. Did the police have probable cause or did they search outside the limits? If so, an attorney may be able to bring a motion to suppress the evidence from any unlawful search.

Note that determining whether a police search violated the law is very fact specific, and different judges can weigh those facts very differently. An attorney who is familiar with your courthouse may be better able to present your situation to a particular judge.  If the police acted unlawfully, an attorney can petition the judge to suppress the evidence from any illegal search.

For example in People v. Smith, the defendant was convicted based on a firearm discovered during a police stop of a car where he was a backseat passenger.  Because the car’s license plates did not match the vehicle, police had probable cause to search for evidence of ownership.  However, the officers bypassed obvious areas, such as the console and glove compartment, to search for a bag in the back seat suggesting  that the purpose of the search was a fishing expedition rather than to look for evidence of ownership.  As a result, the appellate court held that the gun evidence should have been suppressed and reversed defendant’s conviction.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

See also People v. Davis.