Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

DEA agents observed Carney (D) approach a youth, who then accompanied D to a motor home parked in a nearby lot. Agents had previously received information that this home was used by another individual who was exchanging drugs for sex. Agents kept the home under surveillance, and when the youth emerged over an hour later, they approached him. The youth told agents that he had received marijuana in return for sexual contact with D. The agents returned to the home with the youth. When D stepped out, the agents identified themselves, and without warrant or consent, entered the home. They found marijuana, plastic bags, and a drug weighing scale. DEA agents took D into custody and took possession of the home. A search revealed additional marijuana in the cupboards and refrigerator. D was charged with possession of marijuana for sale. He moved to suppress the evidence on the grounds that the search was unreasonable because no warrant was obtained. The magistrate denied the motion. The Superior Court also rejected the motion. D pled nolo contendere and was placed on probation for 3 years. The California Court of Appeal affirmed. The California Supreme Court reversed; the search was unreasonable because no warrant was obtained, rejecting the State's argument that the vehicle exception to the warrant requirement should apply. The state (P) appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.