Ohio v. Robinette

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided 1996-11-18

Cited by 2,017 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Justice Stevens, dissenting. The Court’s holding today is narrow: The Federal Constitution does not require that a lawfully seized person be advised that he is “free to go” before his consent to search will be recognized as voluntary. I agree with that holding. Given the Court’s reading of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ohio, I also agree that it is appropriate for the Court to limit its review to answering…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.