Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) Justice Harlan issued a concurring opinion articulating the two-prong test later adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court as the test for determining whether a police or government search is subject to the limitations of the Fourth Amendment:
Search incident to a lawful arrest, commonly known as search incident to arrest (SITA) or the Chimel rule (from Chimel v.California), is a U.S. legal principle that allows police to perform a warrantless search of an arrested person, and the area within the arrestee’s immediate control, in the interest of officer safety, the prevention of escape, and the preservation of evidence.
Furthermore, the court had already sanctioned an inventory search of an impounded car suspected to contain the service revolver of a fugitive Chicago police officer. [2] The search in this case was conducted according to standard police procedure, and no suggestion existed that the search was a pretext for an investigation.
Getting a search warrant begins in a police department and ends with a specific, restricted list of items allowed to be seized on a specific property.
Illinois v. Wardlow , 528 U.S. 119 (2000), is a case decided before the United States Supreme Court involving U.S. criminal procedure regarding searches and seizures . Background
More: Illinois State Police release 3 videos from in-custody death of Rockford man 'No traumatic injury' Social media posts suggested Bell died as a result of an altercation with Rockford police ...
Police are not required to conduct a search in a way that gives the individual an opportunity to revoke consent, as determined in United States v. 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 ...
Some attorneys and civil liberties advocates emphasize that in an illegal search, even if cops acted in good faith with a warrant, the result is the same: someone’s rights are violated.