In which case did the Supreme Court rule that police officers do not need a warrant to search a vehicle if they have probable cause?

The ruling in California v. Carney established that police officers can search a vehicle without a warrant when they have probable cause to believe it contains evidence of a crime. This decision is rooted in the idea that vehicles are inherently mobile, which could lead to the loss of evidence if officers were required to obtain a warrant first.

In this case, the court recognized a significant difference between the expectation of privacy in a home versus that in a vehicle. Since cars are subject to regulatory scrutiny and have a lower expectation of privacy, the immediate nature of a vehicle search, coupled with probable cause, justifies the warrantless search.

This principle allows police to act swiftly when they have reasonable grounds to suspect that a vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime, thereby ensuring that law enforcement can effectively respond to evolving situations. The balance between individual privacy rights and law enforcement needs is at the heart of this legal precedent, which supports the idea that timely intervention is crucial in preventing the loss of evidence.