Part 4-Reasoning of the Court

Part 4- Reasoning of the Court

Upon coming to a decision, the court used previous trials to help them come up with the decision for this case. “We made this clear in United States v. Ross, 456 U. S. 798, 809 (1982), when we said that in cases where there was probable cause to search a vehicle "a search is not unreasonable if based on facts that would justify the issuance of a warrant, even though a warrant has not been actually obtained." http://law.onecle.com/ussc/527/527us467.html

Since the police brought up another case to use as an alibi, they brought up the case of Ross and Labron. That case stated that, “The holding of the Court of Special Appeals that the "automobile exception" requires a separate finding of exigency in addition to a finding of probable cause is squarely contrary to our holdings in Ross and Labron.” http://law.onecle.com/ussc/527/527us467.html

Although the court knew how bad the case looked upon them reversing it, they used previous cases as resources and saw what was fair. The court did grant them petition for certiorari, and reverse for a reason and had their evidence and resources to back them up on it. Logically, it did not take the courts to decide very long, so I believe they did a very good job.