Brinegar v. United States
Brinegar v. United States (1949) is a Supreme Court case about when police can search or seize without a warrant. The Court ruled that searches without a warrant must be reasonable, even if the police aren’t perfectly correct about every fact.
In the case, Brinegar had a reputation for illegally transporting liquor across state lines. A highway officer stopped his car after recognizing him and noticing the vehicle looked heavily loaded. The officer saw one case of alcohol in the front seat and later seized more alcohol from the car and trunk after the arrest. Brinegar challenged the arrest, saying there wasn’t probable cause for the stop.
The Court held that the arrest was constitutional because there was probable cause to stop Brinegar’s car. It explained that “probable cause” is the standard for making an arrest, not the stricter “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used for convictions. Requiring beyond a reasonable doubt for everyday arrests would hinder law enforcement, while using too little would threaten public safety. The Court emphasized that probable cause means there must be reasonable grounds for belief of guilt, and it will consider the reasonableness of the officer’s belief when judging warrantless searches.
This page was last edited on 2 February 2026, at 10:36 (CET).