Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A dissent in part is a dissenting opinion which disagrees selectively with one or more parts of the majority holding. In decisions that require holdings with multiple parts due to multiple legal claims or consolidated cases, judges may write an opinion "concurring in part and dissenting in part".
Law enforcement officers, except when on duty or acting in an official capacity, have the right to engage in political activity or run for elective office. Law enforcement officers shall, if disciplinary action is expected, be notified of the investigation, the nature of the alleged violation, and be notified of the outcome of the investigation ...
Criminal justice ethics (also police ethics) is the academic study of ethics as it is applied in the area of law enforcement. Usually, a course in ethics is required of candidates for hiring as law enforcement officials. These courses focus on subject matter which is primarily guided by the needs of social institutions and societal values. Law ...
Sticker art arguing that dissent is necessary for democracy.. Dissent is an opinion, philosophy or sentiment of non-agreement or opposition to a prevailing idea or policy enforced under the authority of a government, political party or other entity or individual.
Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435 (2013), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court which held that a cheek swab of an arrestee's DNA is comparable to fingerprinting and therefore, a legal police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act authorized the United States Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division to bring civil ("pattern or practice") suits against local law enforcement agencies, to rein in abuses and hold agencies accountable. [25]
However, if a pursuit is conducted negligently, resulting in death or injury, the law enforcement agency can be held liable under civil law in the United States. Vehicle pursuits have increasingly been covered under written law enforcement agency policy, to help regulate circumstances and manner that they are conducted.
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009), was a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires law-enforcement officers to demonstrate an actual and continuing threat to their safety posed by an arrestee, or a need to preserve evidence related to the crime of arrest from tampering by the arrestee, in order to justify a warrantless ...