## Facts

- Charles McArthur lived in a trailer with his wife, Tera.
- Tera asked police to accompany her to the trailer to retrieve belongings; officers attended to keep the peace.
- After entering and exiting the trailer, Tera told an officer that marijuana was hidden under the couch.
- An officer asked McArthur for consent to search; McArthur refused.
- Police sent an officer with Tera to obtain a search warrant and, meanwhile, barred McArthur from entering the trailer unaccompanied for about two hours.
- McArthur was allowed limited, supervised entry while an officer observed.
- After the warrant issued, officers searched the trailer, found marijuana and drug paraphernalia, and arrested McArthur for misdemeanor possession.
- McArthur moved to suppress the evidence as the product of an unlawful seizure based on the temporary restriction on his access to the home.

## Issues

1. Whether temporarily preventing a resident from entering his home unaccompanied for about two hours, while officers obtain a search warrant, is an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment when police have probable cause and fear evidence destruction.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the suppression order and remanded.
- The Court held, 8–1, that the brief, limited restraint was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
- The Court emphasized that the officers had probable cause, acted to prevent likely destruction of evidence, avoided warrantless entry, limited the restraint in scope, and pursued the warrant diligently within a reasonable time.

## Legal Principles

- The Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness requirement permits some warrantless seizures when a balance of privacy interests and law-enforcement needs supports the intrusion.
- Police may temporarily secure a residence by restricting a suspect’s unaccompanied access while obtaining a warrant when:
  - there is probable cause to believe evidence is inside,
  - there is a concrete, articulable risk the evidence will be destroyed if access is unrestricted,
  - the restraint is narrowly tailored and minimally intrusive (e.g., no search or entry without a warrant; supervised access if needed), and
  - officers act diligently and the restraint lasts no longer than reasonably necessary to obtain the warrant.
- A temporary restriction on access can be treated as a seizure designed to preserve evidence, distinct from a warrantless search or entry into the home.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld a short, carefully limited restriction preventing a suspect from reentering his home alone while officers promptly obtained a search warrant, concluding that the combination of probable cause, risk of evidence destruction, minimal intrusion, and diligent pursuit of a warrant made the seizure reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.


Illinois v. McArthur, 531 U.S. 326 (2001)