Officers were already at the Tucson residence, working a narcotics complaint, when a vehicle pulled into the driveway.

They recognized the driver as Rodney Gant. They also knew his license was suspended.

Gant parked, stepped out, and closed the door behind him. As he moved away from the vehicle, officers approached and placed him under arrest for driving with a suspended license. He was handcuffed without incident and secured in the back of a patrol car.

With Gant no longer at the vehicle, officers turned their attention back to it.

They searched the passenger compartment. Inside, they found a handgun and a jacket on the back seat. In the pocket of that jacket, they located cocaine.

What began as a roadside arrest would move into the courts and, nearly a decade later, reach the highest court in the country.

Gant challenged the search, arguing that once he had been handcuffed and secured, the search of his vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment. Arizona courts reviewed the case through conflicting interpretations of existing precedent, setting the stage for review by the United States Supreme Court.

On April 21, 2009, the Court issued its decision in Arizona v. Gant.

In a 5 to 4 ruling, with Justice John Paul Stevens writing for the majority, the Court addressed the scope of vehicle searches conducted incident to arrest.

The decision established that such a search is permitted only under two specific conditions. Officers may search a vehicle incident to arrest if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search, or if it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence relevant to the offense of arrest.

Applying that standard to the facts of the case, the Court found the search of Gant’s vehicle to be unreasonable. Gant had been handcuffed and secured in a patrol car at the time of the search, and the offense of arrest, driving with a suspended license, did not provide a basis to believe evidence of that offense would be found inside the vehicle.

The ruling also revisited New York v. Belton, a 1981 decision that had been widely understood to permit broader vehicle searches incident to arrest. In Gant, the Court clarified and narrowed that interpretation, placing new limits on when such searches are permitted.

The events that began with a narcotics complaint and a vehicle pulling into a driveway ultimately reshaped how courts define the boundaries of a common search.

On April 21, 2009, Arizona v. Gant became part of that history.