In the case of Collins v. Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ryan Austin Collins, who argued that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated when police conducted a warrantless search on his property. The issue began when an officer pursued a stolen motorcycle and traced it to Mr. Collins' house using social media posts. Without obtaining a warrant, the officer walked onto Mr.Collins’ driveway and lifted up a tarp covering the motorcycle to confirm it was stolen before arresting him for receiving stolen property.The state courts upheld this action as part of "automobile exception" which allows officers to search vehicles without warrants due to their mobile nature.However,the Supreme Court disagreed with this interpretation stating that automobile exception does not give an officer right to enter home or its curtilage (area immediately surrounding it) without warrant.The court held 8-1 decision in favor of Mr.Collins emphasizing importance of privacy at home under fourth amendment.

In the dissenting opinion for Collins v. Virginia, Justice Alito argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous Supreme Court rulings and would have serious implications for law enforcement. He contended that the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, which allows police officers to search a vehicle without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe it contains evidence of a crime, should also apply in this case where an officer lifted up a tarp covering a motorcycle parked on private property. According to Justice Alito, there is no logical reason why this exception should not extend beyond traditional automobiles or public spaces given its original purpose: allowing police officers more flexibility when dealing with mobile vehicles potentially containing evidence of criminal activity. Furthermore, he expressed concern about how limiting this exception could hinder law enforcement efforts by creating unnecessary obstacles and ambiguities.