Police officer conducted an investigatory stop of Strieff without reasonable suspicion.

E809983

Utah v. Strieff is a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether evidence discovered after an unlawful investigatory stop could be admitted under the attenuation doctrine when an outstanding arrest warrant is found.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

Observed surface forms (1)

Surface form Occurrences
Utah v. Strieff 0

Statements (46)

Predicate Object
instanceOf U.S. Supreme Court case
criminal procedure case
appliedDoctrine attenuation doctrine
appliedPrecedent Brown v. Illinois NERFINISHED
Wong Sun v. United States NERFINISHED
aroseFrom State of Utah NERFINISHED
citation 579 U.S. ___ (2016)
concerns admissibility of evidence obtained after unlawful stop
outstanding arrest warrant discovered after stop
unlawful investigatory stop
constitutionalProvision Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution NERFINISHED
decisionDate 2016-06-20
dissentingJustices Elena Kagan NERFINISHED
Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED
Sonia Sotomayor NERFINISHED
dissentOpinionBy Justice Sonia Sotomayor NERFINISHED
effectOnLaw Expanded circumstances where evidence from an unlawful stop may be admitted under attenuation doctrine.
factPattern Officer arrested Strieff on the warrant and searched him incident to arrest.
Officer discovered an outstanding arrest warrant for Strieff during the stop.
Officer found drugs and drug paraphernalia during the search.
Police officer conducted an investigatory stop of Strieff without reasonable suspicion.
hasDocketNumber No. 14-1373
holding Evidence seized incident to a lawful arrest on a valid warrant is admissible when the warrant is discovered after an unlawful investigatory stop, because the discovery of the warrant attenuates the connection between the unlawful stop and the evidence.
jurisdiction Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED
keywords fruit of the poisonous tree
outstanding warrant
search incident to arrest
unlawful stop
legalIssue Fourth Amendment unreasonable searches and seizures
attenuation doctrine
exclusionary rule
lowerCourt Utah Supreme Court NERFINISHED
lowerCourtHolding Evidence should be suppressed as fruit of an unlawful stop.
majorityJustices Anthony M. Kennedy NERFINISHED
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED
John G. Roberts Jr. NERFINISHED
Samuel A. Alito Jr. NERFINISHED
Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED
majorityOpinionBy Justice Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED
petitioner State of Utah NERFINISHED
questionPresented Whether the attenuation doctrine applies when an officer discovers a valid, pre-existing, and untainted arrest warrant during an unlawful investigatory stop.
respondent Edward Joseph Strieff Jr. NERFINISHED
resultForDefendant Strieff was denied suppression of the evidence. NERFINISHED
resultForState State of Utah prevailed in the Supreme Court. NERFINISHED
separateDissentOpinionBy Justice Elena Kagan NERFINISHED
SupremeCourtDisposition Reversed and remanded

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Utah v. Strieff (dissent on Fourth Amendment rights) factPattern Police officer conducted an investigatory stop of Strieff without reasonable suspicion.
subject surface form: Utah v. Strieff