In the case of Winston v. Lee, 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a surgical procedure to remove a bullet from an accused robber could not be performed as it would violate his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The court held that such a surgery was intrusive and potentially dangerous, thus constituting an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment. This decision was based on balancing the need for law enforcement to obtain evidence against protecting individuals' privacy and health interests. The ruling emphasized that each case must be evaluated individually considering both its intrusion into personal privacy and necessity for promoting legitimate governmental interests.

In the dissenting opinion for Winston v. Lee, Justice O'Connor argued that the majority's decision to deny a surgical procedure to recover evidence from a suspect infringes upon society's interest in effective law enforcement and fair prosecution of criminal cases. She contended that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit all intrusions on personal security but only those deemed unreasonable. In her view, reasonableness should be determined by balancing individual rights against societal interests rather than applying an absolute prohibition on certain types of searches or seizures. Furthermore, she disagreed with the majority’s reliance on medical risk as a determining factor because it could lead to inconsistent results depending on varying medical opinions about risk levels associated with different procedures.