No. 20-6774
Craig B. Snoddy v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 4th-amendment colorado-v-bertine fourth-amendment inventory-search investigative-search search-and-seizure south-dakota-v-opperman supreme-court-precedent vehicle-search warrantless-search
Latest Conference:
2021-02-19
Question Presented (from Petition)
Should certiorari be granted to determine whether the court of appeals' decision not to suppress the evidence found in a warrantless vehicle search, when the search was actually done for the purpose of investigation and not as an inventory search, conflicts with this Court's decisions in South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364, 96 S.Ct. 3092 (1976), Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 107 S.Ct. 738 (1987), and Florida v. Wells, 495 U.S. 1, 110 S.Ct. 1632 (1990)?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the court of appeals' decision not to suppress evidence found in a warrantless vehicle search conflicts with Supreme Court precedent on inventory searches
Docket Entries
2021-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2021-01-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
2021-01-11
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2020-12-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 4, 2021)
Attorneys
Craig B. Snoddy
Dennis J. Clark — Clark Law Firm PLLC, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent