McDonald v. State
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
1DissentWendell Griffen, Judge
I agree with Judge Neal that the cases cited by the majority do not justify affirmance because in each of those cases, there was a nexus between the vehicle and the arrest that is sorely lacking in the instant case. Therefore, I join his dissent.
I also write separately to emphasize that by affirming a search where there was no nexus between the vehicle and the arresting conduct and where there was no need to safeguard the vehicle or its contents, the majority has created a new and dangerous precedent which seems to allow police to conduct an at-will search of the vehicle of any recent…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Chambers v. MaroneySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- New York v. BeltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- United States v. ChadwickSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Colorado v. BertineSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.