context: Thus, in each of the cases where the Supreme Court applied the automobile exception and upheld a warrantless search of a vehicle, the police first stopped and seized the vehicle either while an occupant was operating the vehicle on a highway, or while an occupant was inside the vehicle or near it and the vehicle was readily capable of being driven away by the occupant.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.parenthetical: holding warrantless search of vehicle was improper where car was not stopped on a highway but was parked at a residence with no occupants inside or near the vehicle and capable of being driven away by the turn of an ignition key
citation_a.sentence: Cf. Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 478, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971) (holding warrantless search of vehicle was improper where car was not stopped on a highway but was parked at a residence with no occupants inside or near the vehicle and capable of being driven away by the turn of an ignition key).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.parenthetical: "[WJlhen police officers have probable cause to believe there is contraband inside an automobile that has been stopped on the road, the officers may conduct a warrant, less search of the vehicle ...." (emphasis added
citation_b.sentence: See Dyson, 527 U.S. at 466-67, 119 S.Ct. 2013; Labron, 518 U.S. at 939-40, 116 S.Ct. 2485; Carney, 471 U.S. at 388-93, 105 S.Ct. 2066; Thomas, 458 U.S. at 261, 102 S.Ct. 3079 ("[WJlhen police officers have probable cause to believe there is contraband inside an automobile that has been stopped on the road, the officers may conduct a warrant, less search of the vehicle ...." (emphasis added)); Texas v. White, 423 U.S. 67, 67-68, 96 S.Ct. 304, 46 L.Ed.2d 209 (1975) (per curiam); Chambers, 399 U.S. at 51-52, 90 S.Ct. 1975; Carroll, 267 U.S. at 162, 45 S.Ct. 280.