Why Arizona v. Gant Matters and How the Search Incident to Arrest Doctrine Should Change in its Wake

Abstract

In the wake of Arizona v. Gant, lower courts struggle with Gant's effect on searches incident to arrest outside the vehicle context. Some courts find that Gant applies while others do not, restricting the Court's holding to vehicle searches only. But more importantly, many courts that do apply Gant to non-vehicle searches incident to arrest do so in ways that are at odds with Gant's rationales. This Note examines this lower court confusion, highlighting lower courts' unwillingness to abandon the notion of searches incident to arrest as a police entitlement. Gant requires courts to find that the rationales underlying Chimel v. California -- relied upon for the Gant Court's holding -- are present at the time of the search. This interpretation of Gant will restrict non-vehicle searches incident to arrest, better protecting defendants' rights without sacrificing clarity of the rule or officer safety.