|
|
Gustafson v. Florida, 414 U.S. 260 (1973)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Gustafson v. Florida, 414 U.S. 260 (1973)
MR. JUSTICE STEWART, concurring.
It seems to me that a persuasive claim might have been made in this case that the custodial arrest of the petitioner for a minor traffic offense violated his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. But no such claim has been made. Instead, the petitioner has fully conceded the constitutional validity of his custodial arrest. That being so, it follows that the incidental search of his person was also constitutionally valid. To hold otherwise would, as the Court makes clear in this case and in United States v. Robinson, ante, p. 218, mark an abrupt departure from settled constitutional precedent.
Contents:
Chicago: Stewart, "Stewart, J., Concurring," Gustafson v. Florida, 414 U.S. 260 (1973) in 414 U.S. 260 414 U.S. 267. Original Sources, accessed September 28, 2023, http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=DC41F4K34DKXGC2.
MLA: Stewart. "Stewart, J., Concurring." Gustafson v. Florida, 414 U.S. 260 (1973), in 414 U.S. 260, page 414 U.S. 267. Original Sources. 28 Sep. 2023. http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=DC41F4K34DKXGC2.
Harvard: Stewart, 'Stewart, J., Concurring' in Gustafson v. Florida, 414 U.S. 260 (1973). cited in 1973, 414 U.S. 260, pp.414 U.S. 267. Original Sources, retrieved 28 September 2023, from http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=DC41F4K34DKXGC2.
|