Bond V. United States (2000)

(529 U.S. 334, 146 L.Ed.2d 365)

Facts of Case

Steven D. Bonds (petitioner) bag was searched by a US border patrol agent during a routine stop to check the immigration status of passengers on a bus. Bond was a passenger in the said bus. In the course of the said exercise, the agent happened to squeeze Bonds bag and felt what could be described as a hard brick-like object inside the bag. After seeking and obtaining a search consent from Bond, the agent opened the bag and found the brick-like object to be methamphetamine. Bond was immediately placed under arrest and later on processed to face Federal drug charges.

Procedural History

In the district court, Bond sought to suppress the evidence presented in court (i.e. the methamphetamine brick) arguing that the agents move to squeeze the bag was in itself an illegal search. For this reason, he was of the opinion that the said officer violated the unreasonable searches...

This motion was denied. Subsequently, Bond was found guilty. He appealed the decision. The Court of Appeals made a finding to the effect that under the Fourth Amendment, the...…in an exploratory manner (Bacigal and Tate, 2014).

Holding

As a result, in a 7-2 opinion, the court came to the conclusion that the Fourth Amendment was violated following the US border patrol agents move to physically manipulate the bag belonging to Bond. Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote the opinion.

Dissents (if any)

Two judges, i.e. Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Stephen G. Breyer, did not agree with the decision of the majority. In this case, both indicated that there was no reasonable expectation that the belongings or luggage belonging to a passenger on a bus could (or would) not be manipulated by strangers in…