Ybarra v. Illinois
Citation: 444 U.S. 85 (1979)
Facts
Police had a warrant to search a tavern and its bartender for heroin. When they arrived, they also patted down all customers present, including Ybarra, finding drugs. The warrant did not specifically name Ybarra.
Issue
Does the existence of a warrant to search a place authorize police to also search all persons found on the premises?
Holding
No. The Fourth Amendment’s particularity requirement means that a search warrant for a place does not automatically authorize the search of all persons found there. Searching persons requires independent probable cause or reasonable suspicion as to each person.
Rule
Mere propinquity: Mere propinquity (physical presence near a searched place or person) is insufficient to establish probable cause to search or seize an individual. Each person’s Fourth Amendment rights must be independently justified.
A warrant to search a premises authorizes search of the premises described; it does not carry over to authorize search of persons found on the premises absent independent justification.
Significance
- Critical limitation on the scope of place warrants
- Prevents general “roundup” searches of all persons present when a warrant targets a specific location
- Distinguished from Wyoming v. Houghton: that case involved a vehicle search under the automobile exception where probable cause to search the vehicle extended to containers within it; Ybarra involves persons, who have independent Fourth Amendment rights
- A specific “all persons” warrant (rare) might permit such searches if probable cause is shown