United States v. Brignoni-Ponce | |
---|---|
Argued February 18, 1975 Decided June 30, 1975 | |
Full case name | United States v. Brignoni-Ponce |
Citations | 422 U.S. 873 (more) 95 S. Ct. 2574; 45 L. Ed. 2d 607; 1975 U.S. LEXIS 10 |
Case history | |
Prior | Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
Holding | |
Border Patrol officers on roving patrols cannot stop a vehicle near border when the only ground for suspicion is that the occupants appear to be of Mexican ancestry. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Powell, joined by Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Rehnquist |
Concurrence | Rehnquist |
Concurrence | Burger (in judgment), joined by Blackmun |
Concurrence | Douglas (in judgment) |
Concurrence | White (in judgment), joined by Blackmun |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. IV |
Part of a series on |
Chicanos and Mexican Americans |
---|
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975), was a case in which the Supreme Court determined it was a violation of the Fourth Amendment for a roving patrol car to stop a vehicle solely on the basis of the driver appearing to be of Mexican descent.[1] A roving patrol car must have articulable facts that allow for an officer to have a reasonable suspicion that the person is carrying illegal aliens beyond their ethnicity. The Court handed down a 9–0 decision that affirmed the Circuit Court's ruling in the case.[2] This case was also the final case that William O. Douglas presided on, as he retired shortly after this case, ending his record 36 years as an Associate Justice.