DevonLee

EliCameron
English
May5,2014
IRAC:Bondvs.UnitedStates

PetitionerStevenDewayneBondwasapassengeronaGreyhoundbusthatwasonitswayto
LittleRock,ArkansasfromCalifornia.OnthewaytoArkansas,thebusstoppedatthepermanent
BorderPatrolcheckpointinSierraBlanca,Texas,asitwasrequiredto.BorderPatrolAgentCesar
Cantythenboardedthebustomakesurethatallthepassengershadtherightimmigrationstatus.Once
hemadeittothebackofthebus,andfeltsatisfiedthatallthepassengerswerelawfullyintheUnited
States,AgentCantustartedtowalktowardsthefrontofthebus.Alongthewaytothefrontofthebus,
AgentCantusqueezedthesoftluggagethatthepassengersplacesintheoverheadstorageabovethe
seats.PetitionerwassittingonthefourthorfifthrowfromthebackofthebusandasAgentCantuwas
inspectingpetitioner'sluggage,AgentCantufeltabricklikeobject.Petitioneradmittedthatthe
luggagewashisandagreedtoallowAgentCantutoopenit.WhenAgentCantuwasopeningthebag,
hediscoveredthethebricklikeobjectwasabrickofmethamphetamine.Thedrugswerewrapped
inducttapeuntilitreachedanovalshapeandthenitwasrolledintoapairofpants.Petitionerwas
indictedforconspiracytopossess,andpossessionwithintenttodistributemethamphetamine.Petitioner
arguedthatAgentCantuconductedanillegalsearchofhisbag.Petitionersmotionwasdeniedandthe
DistrictCourtfoundhimguiltyofbothcountsandhissentencewas57monthsinprison.Onappeal,
petitionersaidthatotherpassengershadaccesstohisbag,butsaidthatAgentCantufeltandsqueezed
thebadinawaythatapersonnormallywouldnot.TheCourtofAppealsrejectedthisarguementand
statedthatAgentCantusmanipulationofthebagwastodetectcontrabandisirrelevantforFourth
Amendmentpurposes.Thus,theCourtofAppealsaffirmedtheholdingthatAgentCantusmanipulation
ofthebagwasnotasearchwithinthemeaningoftheFourthAmendment.Thelegalquestionthatwe
needtoansweris:whethertheindividual,byhisconduct,hasexhibitedanactualexpectationof
privacythatis,whetherhehasshownthathe[sought]topreserve[something]asprivate.The
secondlegalquestionweneedtoansweristoweinquiretheindividualsexpectationofprivacyisone
thatsocietyispreparedtorecognizeasreasonable.
PetitionerclaimsthatAgentCantumadeanillegalsearchofhisbagthereforeclaimingthat
AgentCantuviolatedhis4thAmendmentrights.AgentCantu,beinganactorofthestateaskedbefore
evensearchingpetitionersbagforpermissiontosearchthebag.Petitioneragreedtolethimsearchthe
bag,makinganythingthatpetitionersayaboutFourthAmendmentrightsirrelevant.DoesBond,
petitioner,havestanding?Bondsbagwasnotoutintheopen,andAgentCantuneededtoaskBondto
knowwhatwasinthebag,sothebaghadtohavebeenprivatetosomeextent.Ithinkthatsocietyis
willingtorecognizethatthesearchwasreasonablebecauseAgentCantuwasdoinghisjob,makingsure
therewerenocontrabanddrugsonthebus,andhehadsuspicionthatBondhadsomethingabnormalin
hisbag.
BeforethesearchofBondsbagoccurred,AgentCantuaskedBondforpermissiontosearch
hisbagbecauseonthewaybacktothefrontofthebus,AgentCantuwasgoingthroughprocedureto
makesuretherewasnothingabnormalinanyluggage.SinceAgentCantudiscoveredabricklike
objectinthebag,heaskedBondforpermission.BondagreestoallowAgentCantutosearchhisbag
andupondoingso,AgentCantufindsabrickofmethamphetamine.Thedrugswerewrappedupin
ducttapeandthenrolledupinapairofpants.Thepoliceofficerswerewithintheirlegallimitsbecause
theyhadreasonablesuspicionthattherewassomethingfishygoingonwhenAgentCantufounda
bricklikeobjectinabagandalsobecauseofthefactthatBondgavethempermissiontosearchhis
bag,makingitaconsensualsearch.BondarguedthatAgentCantumadeanillegalsearch.TheDistrict
Courtfoundhimguiltyonbothcountsandhewasthensentencedto57monthsinprison.Bond
appealedandthensaidthatAgentCantumanipulatedthebaginawaythatanyothernormalperson
wouldnot.Animportantfactthatwasstatedintheissuewasthedetailinhowthedrugswereattempted
tobehidden.ThedrugswerenotjustinabaginBondsluggage.Itwaswrappedupinalayerofduct
tapethatformedanovalshapeandtheninanotherattempttohidethedrugs,theywererolledupina
pairofpants.Thisshowsthatthepersonthatputthedrugsintothebagknewthattheywereprobably
goingtobearoundactorsofthestateandwantedtokeepitawayfromanythingsuspicious.
Unfortunatelyforthem,theywerewrong.
Toareaderspointofview,itseemedasthoughBondrealizedthathewasnotgoingtoget
awaywithsayingthatthesearchwasillegalsohemadeitseemlikeAgentCantumanipulatedtheentire
searchtohisownbenefit.LiketheDistrictCourt,IwouldfindBondguiltyonbothcountsbecause
BondgaveAgentCantupermissiontosearchhisbag,makingthesearchconsensual,andalsobasedon
thefactthatcontrabanddrugswerefoundanditseemedlikeBondwastryingtofindeveryexcuseto
pinthenonexistentillegalsearchonAgentCantu.