# New York v. Belton > Supreme Court of the United States · September 23, 1981 · 453 U.S. 454 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9428492 ## Case - **Full name:** New York v. Belton - **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States - **Decided:** September 23, 1981 - **Citations:** 453 U.S. 454; 101 S. Ct. 2860; 69 L. Ed. 2d 768; 1981 U.S. LEXIS 13 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Dissent by White - **Judges:** Stewart, Burger, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist, Stevens, Brennan, White, Marshall - **Cited by:** 2,937 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - **Yellow flag:** Reported abrogated by Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) — not on the Supreme Court's list. - Negative treatments: 9 - Distinguished by: 12 - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9428492 ## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction) - holding that when an officer makes a lawful custodial arrest of the occupants of an automobile he may, as incident of that arrest, search the passenger compartment of the vehicle and may also examine the contents of any container found within the passenger compartment. Contain… - holding that police may search the passenger compartment of a car incident to a lawful arrest under principle that a search of the area within the "immediate control of the arrestee" may occur and noting "articles inside the relatively narrow compass of the passenger compartme… - holding “[s]uch a container may, of course, be searched whether it is open or closed, since the justification for the search is not that the arrestee has no privacy interest in the container, but that the lawful custodial arrest justifies the infringement of any privacy intere… - holding that “when a policeman has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the passenger compartment of that automobile” and “examine the contents of any containers found within the passenger… - holding that ________ ______ after policeman has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, "examine the contents of any containers," including glove compartments, found within the passenger compartment ## Opinion text Justice White, with whom Justice Marshall joins, dissenting. In Robbins v. California, ante, p. 420, it was held that a wrapped container in the trunk of a car could not be searched without a warrant even though the trunk itself could be searched without a warrant because there was probable cause to search the car and even though there was probable cause to search the container as well. This was because of the separate interest in privacy with respect to the container. The Court now holds that as incident to the arrest of the driver or any other person in an automobile, the interior of the car and any container found therein, whether locked or not, may be not only seized but also searched even absent probable cause to believe that contraband or evidence of crime will be found. As to luggage, briefcases, or other containers, this seems to me an extreme extension of Chimel and one to which I cannot subscribe. Even if the decision in Robbins had been otherwise and United States v. Chadwick, 433 U. S. 1 (1977), and Arkansas v. Sanders, 442 U. S. 753 (1979), had been overruled, luggage found in the trunk of a car could not be searched without probable cause to believe it contained contraband or evidence. Here, searches of luggage, briefcases, and other containers in the interior of an auto are authorized in the absence of any suspicion whatsoever that they contain anything in which the police have a legitimate interest. This calls for more caution than the Court today exhibits, and, with respect, I dissent. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9428492. Public record. Not legal advice.