Rejects argument that “the natural metabolization of alcohol in the bloodstream presents a per se exigency that justifies an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement for nonconsensual blood testing in all drunk-driving cases,” and holds instead “that exigency in this context must be determined case by case based on the totality of the circumstances.”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Police using a drug dog at a home’s front door was a Fourth Amendment search.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

To determine if there is probable cause based on a drug dog alert, this decision establishes the Fourth Amendment analysis for when “a sniff is up to snuff.”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

The Fourth Amendment rule allowing occupants of premises to be temporarily seized while a warrant is executed is limited to persons “in the immediate vicinity” of the premises to be searched.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

The Padilla v. Kentucky Sixth Amendment holding, requiring defense counsel to advise of risk of deportation entailed in a guilty plea, does not have retroactive application to convictions which became final prior to Padilla’s decision date (which was March 31, 2010).

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion