Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973)

Facts

Officer was on routine patrol when he stopped vehicle for burned out lights.  Gonzales was the driver, with five other passengers, including Bustamonte.  Gonzales had no identification but Alcala did and explained it was his brother’s car.  Officer asked Alcala if he could search the car and Alcala consented.  Officer discovered checks stolen from a car wash.

Procedural History

Bustamonte moved to suppress the checks but the trial judge denied the motion and Bustamonte was convicted.  The Court of Appeals affirmed, utilizing a totality of the circumstances test for Alcala’s consent.  Bustamonte filed a writ of habeas corpus and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that the State was under an obligation to show it was understood consent could be freely withheld.

Issue(s)

Did the Ninth Circuit err in finding that in order for consent to be valid, that it was not only uncoerced but given with an understanding that it could be freely and effectively withheld?

Holding(s)

Yes.

Reasoning/Analysis

The Court found that prior decisions did not turn on the presence or absence of a single controlling criterion; each reflected a careful scrutiny of all the surrounding circumstances.  The question whether a consent to a search was in fact voluntary or was the product of duress or coercion, express or implied, is a question of fact to be determined from the totality of the circumstances.  The approach of the Ninth Circuit finds no support in any of our decisions that have attempted to define the meaning of voluntary.

Judgment/Outcome

The Court reversed the judgment of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.