Warrantless searches and seizures of vehicles are generally against the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. In contrast, there are exceptions to warrantless searches and seizures such as: probable cause, “automobile exceptions” or “officers’ safety” exception. In California v. Carney 471 U.S. 386, 105 S. Ct. 2066, 85 L. Ed.2d 406 (1985), the defendant Carney was arrested on the charge of possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. Police saw the defendant with an underage kid entering Carney’s motor home which was parked in an off-the-street lot in downtown San Diego and closing the curtains. Later on police stopped a youth who explained that Carney used him sexually in exchange for marijuana. At the police’s request the young boy knocked on the door and when Carney opened it and stepped out, the police went into his mobile home without a warrant or consent and observed marijuana in plain view. Police arrested the defendant and charged him with drug possession. His motor home was also seized. An additional search of the motor home revealed more marijuana. Carney made a motion to suppress this evidence. The motion was denied by the trial court finding that the "automobile exception" applied to a motor home. The issue in California v. Carney was whether the police search of Carney’s Dodge Mini Motor Home was unreasonable. According to The Toronto Star, LexisNexis Academic (1992), “...In order to do so, the court said, they must have reasonable and probable grounds to believe someone in the vehicle has committed an offense before they can search it.” In California v. Carney police did not search a regular car but motor home which is movable and satisfied “automobile exception." “The capacity to be “quickly moved” was clearly the basis of the holdi