Laws: The state argues it's necessary to protect officer's safety and to
preserve evidence.

Des Moines, Iowa Patrick Knowles knew he was speeding that day. Frustrated
that his old car was sputtering,he had stomped on the gas pedal to keep the
engine from dying.

When a policeman drove by and quickly turned around, Knowles knew he
probably would be pulled over and given a speeding ticket. He did not
expect the officer to tell him he needed to search his car.

But on March 6, 1996, when Newton officer Ronald Cook did search Knowles'
car without his permission - which is legal under Iowa statutes - he found
marijuana and a pipe under the front passenger seat. Knowles said a friend
had left it, but he was liable because it was in his car.

Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Knowles' argument that the search
violated the U.S. Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches
and that the marijuana should not be used as evidence.

"There is an overwhelming privacy issue involved," said his lawyer, Maria
Ruhtenberg argues that officers must have some suspicion of illegal
activity to justify a search with only a citation.

At Knowles' trial, Cook testified that he did not suspect Knowles of
criminal activity.

A state trial judge ruled against Knowles' argument that the marijuana
should not be used as evidence. Knowles was convicted of possession of
marijuana and keeping marijuana in his car and sentenced to 90 days in
jail. In October 1997, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld his conviction in a
5-4 decision.

The case has drawn widespread interest, with the American Civil Liberties
Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filing
arguments in support of Knowles and the National Association of Police
Organizations backing Iowa.

Checked-by: Pat Dolan