enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Pennsylvania v. Mimms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_v._Mimms

    Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court criminal law decision holding that a police officer ordering a person out of a car following a traffic stop and conducting a pat-down to check for weapons did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

  3. Maryland v. Wilson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_v._Wilson

    Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (1997), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court held that officers could order passengers out a car during a traffic stop, extending Pennsylvania v. Mimms.

  4. List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 434

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 434 ... Date decided New Hampshire v. Maine: 434 U.S. 1: 1977: ... Pennsylvania v. Mimms: 434 ...

  5. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Pennsylvania

    Mimms (1975), in which the Court held that the unlawful possession charges as well as the relevant convictions and sentences against Harry Mimms over his illicit possession and concealed carry of an unlicensed firearm must be vacated and his case should be remanded for a new trial with the suppression of evidence due to violations of his Fourth ...

  6. At issue was a state law that barred 18-to-20 years olds from open carrying firearms during declared states of emergencies. The court’s decision tosses a federal appeals court ruling that found ...

  7. A Foreclosure Fiasco: The Case of Tandala Mims v. Wells Fargo

    www.aol.com/news/2010-12-07-foreclosure-document...

    For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us

  8. Traffic stop - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_stop

    In some cases, notably DUI stops, the "sufficient evidence" is used for requiring an evidentiary chemical test (e.g., evidential breathalyzer test) by invoking an implied consent request. While state terminology regarding whether evidentiary testing is an "arrest", such testing is constitutionally a "search incident to arrest".

  9. Fort Pierce City Manager Nick Mimms arrested on bid rigging ...

    www.aol.com/fort-pierce-city-manager-nick...

    Mimms faces charges that carry potential penalties of 20 years in prison and $15,000 in fines, according to state law. Bid-tampering is a second-degree felony, which has a maximum sentence of 15 ...