It applies to the searching of cars. Because a car is mobile, the standard to search is lower, this is reffered to as the carol doctrine. An officer still needs to have a reason to search but instead of probable cause, they only need reasonable suspicion. It is a lot easier for them to get into cars.
I belive in some areas of the country it is obsolete.
2006-08-31 22:50:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by delanisdjd 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Carroll Doctrine
2016-10-06 08:06:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by mccleery 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Carroll doctrine permits a police officer to search an entire motor vehicle and any containers inside it if there is probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or the fruits, instrumentalities or evidence of criminal activity.
In 1924, the National Prohibition Act was in place to enforce the now-repealed Eighteenth Amendment. That Act made it “unlawful to have or possess any liquor intended for use in violation of the Act” and gave government officers the power to confiscate and destroy alcoholic beverages. In the specifics of the case, the “Carroll boys” were believed by the officers to be bootleggers in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Officers had watched them traveling from Grand Rapids to Detroit across an international boundary that was known as an artery for the illegal importation of alcoholic beverages. Later, the same men were observed driving back from Detroit to Grand Rapids. The officers, suspecting that the automobile carried bottles of alcohol, stopped and searched the vehicle. They discovered several bottles of whiskey hidden in the automobile’s upholstery. The United States Supreme Court justified the warrantless search of the automobile based on two factors: probable cause existed to believe that the vehicle contained contraband and “it [was] not practicable to secure a warrant because the vehicle [could] be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant [was] sought.” The Court expressly distinguished the search of a store, residence or other fixed structure, for which obtaining a search warrant is practicable, from the search of moveable items such as cars, boats and wagons, for which it is not practicable to obtain a search warrant.
The Court’s approval of an immediate warrantless search justified by the automobile’s mobility implicitly recognized an exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement. Carroll created a bright-line rule that presumes exigency based upon the mobility of an automobile (or other mobile vehicle) suspected to contain contraband or other evidence of criminal activity. Thus, the original premise of Carroll’s automobile exception was that a warrantless search is reasonable and necessary because a search could be thwarted simply by moving the automobile out of the “locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant must be sought.” The time needed to obtain a search warrant in 1924, including travel time to and from the courthouse as well as the time to complete the actual paperwork, obviously would have permitted the vehicle to leave the jurisdiction. The alternative—police immobilization of the vehicle for several hours or days—would have violated the Fourth Amendment proscription against unreasonable seizures without a warrant. Thus, the Carroll doctrine—the first recognized automobile exception—was born.
2006-08-31 22:53:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by crimsonshedemon 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
what is the carol doctrine?
2015-08-20 08:59:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by Idalia 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
carol doctrine
2016-01-30 20:02:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Sandra 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am with slicktop, good job above, but who can resist some easy points. Take care and be safe.
2006-08-31 22:57:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by HBPD 126 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Excellent answers above so I won't restate what is already here. But...I'll take the 2 points. Thanks.
2006-08-31 22:55:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋