Colorado v. Bertine

Colorado v. Bertine
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 10, 1986 Decided January 14, 1987
Full case name	Colorado v. Steven Lee Bertine
Docket no.	85-889
Citations	479 U.S. 367 ( more ) 107 S. Ct. 738; 93 L. Ed. 2d 739
Argument	Oral argument
Case history
Prior	People v. Bertine, 706 P.2d 411 (Colo. 1985); cert. granted, 475 U.S. 1081(1986).
Holding
The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit a State from proving criminal charges using the evidence discovered during an inventory search.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr.  · Byron White Thurgood Marshall  · Harry Blackmun Lewis F. Powell Jr.  · John P. Stevens Sandra Day O'Connor  · Antonin Scalia
Case opinions
Majority	Rehnquist, joined by White, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia
Concurrence	Blackmun, joined by Powell, O'Connor
Dissent	Marshall, joined by Brennan
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. IV

Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367 (1987), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit a State from proving charges with the evidence discovered during an inventory search. ^[1]

Background

In 1984, Steven Bertine was arrested for driving under the influence.

Prior to his truck being impounded, an officer inventoried the contents according to the department's procedure and discovered a backpack, which he opened. ^[2] Inside, he discovered controlled substances, paraphernalia, and a large amount of cash. Bertine was subsequently charged with driving under the influence and unlawful possession of cocaine. ^[3]

At trial, Bertine made a motion to suppress the evidence gathered, arguing that the search violated the Fourth Amendment. ^[3] The trial court agreed, but relied on the Colorado Constitution. ^[2]

On appeal, the Supreme Court of Colorado affirmed, relying on the Federal Constitution and the Fourth Amendment. ^[4]

Holding

The Supreme Court reversed on appeal. Writing for the Majority, Chief Justice Rehnquist relied on past precedent from Illinois v. Lafayette and South Dakota v. Opperman to determine that the government had a legitimate interest in securing the property they took into custody, and that because the purpose of the search was not to uncover evidence, the warrant requirement did not apply. ^[2]

In particular, the Court held than an officer conducting an inventory search in accordance with a standard department procedure is reasonable, ^[2] provided that no ulterior investigatory motive exists. ^[4]

Blackmun's Concurrence

Justice Blackmun concurred, writing only to emphasize the underlying rationale that police should not have discretion to determine the scope of the search, ^[2] thus ensuring that inventory searches are not used for the purpose of discovering evidence. ^[1]

Marshall's Dissent

In his dissent, Justice Marshall rejected the Majority's determination that the search was required by standardized procedure, ^[4] noting that the department's policy allows officers discretion in whether to impound a car and therefore whether an inventory search is necessary. ^[3]

Additionally, Marshall asserted that Bertine reasonably had a greater expectation of privacy in his backpack than in his car, which outweighed the government's interests. ^[3]

References

1. Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 369 (1987).
2. Brennan, Shauna (January 1, 1987). "Automobile Inventory Search Exception: The Supreme Court Disregards Fourth Amendment Rights in Colorado v. Bertine--The States Must Protect the Motorist". Notre Dame Law Review. 62 (3). Retrieved October 20, 2025.
3. Morrison, William (1987). "Recent Developments: Colorado v. Bertine: Automobile Inventory Exception to the Fourth Amendment Warrant Rule". University of Baltimore Law Forum. 17 (3). Retrieved October 20, 2025.
4. Alvarez, Fred (1988). "Colorado v. Bertine: An Expansion of the Inventory Doctrine as Applied to Vehicles and Its Impact on Illinois Law". Loyola University Chicago Law Journal. 19 (3). Retrieved October 20, 2025.

External links

• Text of Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367(1987) is available from: Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)