[1] In an 8–1 judgment, the Supreme Court ruled that the automobile exception does not apply to vehicles parked within the home or the curtilage of a private homeowner.

Rhodes had recognized the colors from a previous high-speed chase two months earlier in which the rider of the motorcycle had eluded him.

With that as probable cause, Rhodes entered the property in the absence of Collins and, without a warrant, lifted the tarp, took additional photographs, and determined that the bike had been stolen.

[4] Collins petitioned the Supreme Court for writ of certiorari on whether the Fourth Amendment protected his rights of privacy for the area a few feet from the boundaries of his home.

[7] In oral arguments, the justices discussed the curtilage, the homeowner's expectation of privacy there and the officer's right to enter the property.

They also discussed the difference between an automobile, which is potentially mobile and creates an exigent circumstance for search, with drugs or papers, which are immobile.