Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Florida v. Royer Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States1983Docket #224381
75 L. Ed. 2d 229 103 S. Ct. 1319 460 U.S. 491 1983 U.S. LEXIS 151 51 U.S.L.W. 4293 Criminal Procedure Constitutional Law

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: Police took a drug courier suspect’s ticket and ID and moved him to a small room for questioning. The Supreme Court found this exceeded a brief investigative stop, becoming an illegal arrest that tainted the suspect’s subsequent consent to a luggage search.

Legal Significance: This case clarifies the limits of investigative detentions under Terry v. Ohio, establishing that a stop’s scope must be minimally intrusive. A detention that becomes tantamount to an arrest requires probable cause, and any consent obtained during such an illegal detention is invalid.

Florida v. Royer Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Two plainclothes detectives at Miami International Airport observed Mark Royer, who they believed fit a “drug courier profile.” They approached Royer, identified themselves, and asked to see his airline ticket and driver’s license. The ticket was under the name “Holt,” while the license was under “Royer.” The detectives did not return his documents. They informed Royer they were narcotics investigators and suspected him of transporting drugs, then asked him to accompany them to a nearby room, described as a “large storage closet.” Royer complied. Without his consent, one detective retrieved Royer’s checked luggage and brought it to the room. Inside, the officers asked for consent to search the bags. Royer produced a key for one suitcase, which contained marijuana. He then consented to the officers prying open the second suitcase, which also contained marijuana. Approximately 15 minutes elapsed between the initial encounter and the arrest. The trial court denied Royer’s motion to suppress, but the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, finding the consent was tainted by an illegal, involuntary confinement.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a law enforcement officer’s detention of a suspect exceed the permissible scope of an investigative stop under Terry v. Ohio when the officer, without probable cause, relocates the suspect to a private room, retains his identification and airline ticket, and retrieves his luggage?

(Plurality Opinion) Yes. Royer was being illegally detained when he consented to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehend

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a law enforcement officer’s detention of a suspect exceed the permissible scope of an investigative stop under Terry v. Ohio when the officer, without probable cause, relocates the suspect to a private room, retains his identification and airline ticket, and retrieves his luggage?

Conclusion

*Florida v. Royer* is a seminal case that defines the boundary between Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut

Legal Rule

An investigative detention must be temporary, last no longer than necessary to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nu

Legal Analysis

The plurality opinion, authored by Justice White, reasoned that while the initial Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud e

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • An investigative detention under Terry v. Ohio must be temporary and
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non pro

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

The law is a jealous mistress, and requires a long and constant courtship.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+