enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schneckloth_v._Bustamonte

    Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled that in a case involving a consent search, although knowledge of a right to refuse consent is a factor in determining whether a grant of consent to a search was voluntary, the state does not need to prove that the person who granted consent to search knew of the right to refuse consent under the Fourth ...

  3. Consent search - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_search

    Rich, where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected the argument that "officials must conduct all searches in plain view of the suspect, and in a manner slowly enough that he may withdraw or delimit his consent at any time during the search." A 2024 study found that consent searches are less likely than probable cause searches ...

  4. Consent management - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_management

    Consent management is a system, process or set of policies for allowing consumers to determine information they are willing to permit their various providers to access. . Originally it was related to health care so it was enabling patients and consumers to affirm their participation in e-health initiatives and to establish consent directives to determine who will have access to their protected ...

  5. Medical privacy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_privacy

    A 2012 nationwide survey in Australia assessed privacy concerns on patients' health care decisions, which could impact patient care. Results listed that 49.1% of Australian patients stated they have withheld or would withhold information from their health care provider based on privacy concerns. [34] How does consent impact privacy?

  6. List of consent to search case law articles - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_consent_to_search...

    Illinois v. Rodriguez (1990) - search valid if police reasonably believe consent given by owner; Florida v. Bostick (1991) - not "free to leave" but "free to decline" on bus; Florida v. Jimeno (1991) - can request officer to limit scope of search; Ohio v. Robinette (1996) - do not have to inform motorist is free to go; United States v.

  7. Board of Education v. Earls - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_Education_v._Earls

    Board of Education v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002), was a case by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 5–4, that it does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for public schools to conduct mandatory drug testing on students participating in extracurricular activities.

  8. Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the...

    The Bill of Rights in the National Archives. The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights.It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets requirements for issuing warrants: warrants must be issued by a judge or magistrate, justified by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and must particularly describe the place to be ...

  9. Illinois v. Rodriguez - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_v._Rodriguez

    Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the issue of whether a warrantless search conducted pursuant to third party consent violates the Fourth Amendment when the third party does not actually possess common authority over the premises.