WASHINGTON ( CNN ) -- The case : routine . One man 's summary of the facts : anything but . Chief Justice John Roberts shows his writing chops in a dissenting Supreme Court opinion . The man in this case is the top man at the Supreme Court , Chief Justice John Roberts , who on Tuesday turned a brief dissent in a criminal appeal into something straight out of a Dashiell Hammett detective novel . He offered his thoughts in a case about whether a police officer 's arrest of a drug suspect was proper . Let Roberts tell the story in his own words : . `` North Philly , May 4 , 2001 . Officer Sean Devlin , Narcotics Strike Force , was working the morning shift . Undercover surveillance . The neighborhood ? Tough as a three-dollar steak . Devlin knew . Five years on the beat , nine months with the Strike Force . He 'd made fifteen , twenty drug busts in the neighborhood . `` Devlin spotted him : a lone man in the corner . Another approached . Quick exchange of words . Cash handed over ; small objects handed back . Each man then quickly on his own way . Devlin knew the guy was n't buying bus tokens . He radioed a description and Officer Stein picked up the buyer . Sure enough : three bags of crack [ cocaine ] in the guy 's pocket . Head downtown and book him . Just another day at the office . '' The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ultimately tossed out the suspect 's conviction on possession of a controlled substance . Seven of Roberts colleagues rejected an opportunity to fully hear the state 's appeal , prompting his turn at creative opinion-writing . Justice Anthony Kennedy agreed with Roberts ' conclusions , if not his flair for Sam Spade-style rhetoric . Roberts later got serious in his dissent , writing , `` I think the police clearly had probable cause to arrest the defendant . '' This is not the first time the 53-year-old chief justice has spiced up his writings with cultural references . In a July dissent in an especially dry case over who can file certain lawsuits , he quoted singer Bob Dylan . Or misquoted him . Amid arcane talk of legal standing and redressability , the youngest member of the high court showed his generational bearings by citing part of the lyrics from Dylan 's `` Like a Rolling Stone . '' `` The absence of any right to the substantive recovery means that respondents can not benefit from the judgment they seek and thus lack Article III standing . 'When you got nothing , you got nothing to lose . ' `` Roberts then acknowledged the line came from the singer 's 1965 album `` Highway 61 Revisited , '' and even helpfully added the record label in parentheses ( Columbia Records ) . Court historians will note it is very likely the first time a rock lyric was cited in a high court opinion . But in a profession that values accuracy , Roberts got it wrong . The actual lyric on `` Highway 61 Revisited '' goes , `` When you ai n't got nothing , you got nothing to lose '' -- note the word `` ai n't . '' The elusive `` ai n't '' has been debated by Dylan scholars . Dylan 's own Web site , bobdylan.com , does not include `` ai n't '' in the lyrics . Other references are divided on the issue , and there are certainly recorded versions of the song that do n't include it . But at least on `` Highway 61 Revisited , '' Dylan does indeed say `` ai n't . '' Perhaps the law clerks provided Roberts with an incorrect citation . Or maybe the chief justice just remembered the line differently from his younger , less stuffy days . The chief justice never explained the reasons behind his literary leanings . He does n't have to .
John Roberts ' opinions show literary flair , include pop culture references . Comment: He once misquoted Bob Dylan song `` Like a Rolling Stone '' in an opinion .