Whren v. United States:   
US Supreme Court. 

Statement of the Case:

      State prosecuted and convicted Whren for drug violations when he was stopped in the car for violating traffic laws and the officer saw him holding crack.

Procedure:

      Trial and appellate court ruled for the State.

Facts:

• Plainclothes police officers spotted a vehicle that stopped at a stop sign for unusually long time and after the officers turned back their vehicles, the vehicle turned without a turn signal at high speed. 
• The officers stopped the truck and spotted two large plastic bags that contained crack cocaine in Whren’s hands.
• The petitioners argue that the stop based on a minor traffic violation was pretextual.

Issue:

      Whether the temporary detention of a motorist who the police have probable cause to believe has committed a civil traffic violation violates the 4^th Amendment prohibition against unreasonable seizures when an officer could have been motivated to stop the car by a desire to enforce the traffic laws.

Procedural Result:

      Judgment affirmed.

Holding:

      The temporary detention of a motorist who the police have probable cause to believe has committed a civil traffic violation does not violate the 4^th Amendment prohibition against unreasonable seizures when an officer could have been motivated to stop the car by a desire to enforce the traffic laws.

Reasoning:

• First of all, all traffic stops constitute seizure of persons and police officers must have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. 
• It has been held by the Court in the past that a subjective intent alone does not make otherwise lawful conduct illegal or unconstitutional. 
• Subjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause 4^th Amendment analysis. 
• Also, it would be unreasonable to place judges in the shoes of the police officers because police practices vary from place to place. 
• Therefore, where police has probable cause to believe that a motorist has violated a traffic law, a stop and temporary seizure may be conducted and this stop does not become unconstitutional just because the officer has some hidden subjective purpose.