Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
R v Storrey [1990] 1 S.C.R. 241 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the authority of police officers to make arrests. In addition to an officer's subjective belief that there are reasonable and probable grounds for arrest, the Court stipulated the grounds must be objectively justifiable.
The Canadian system of police powers on reasonable and probable grounds is more clearly defined; a tip from an informer reporting a crime is insufficient to establish reasonable and probable grounds. [36] In Australia it depends on the circumstances of the case, rather than on the reasonable and probable grounds itself. [4]
Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard of proof that in United States law is less than probable cause, the legal standard for arrests and warrants, but more than an "inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or 'hunch ' "; [1] it must be based on "specific and articulable facts", "taken together with rational inferences from those facts", [2] and the suspicion must be associated with the ...
Former law enforcement and military officers are accused of using threats and violence in an effort to extort an Irvine man for nearly $37 million. 'Mercenary group' with ex-L.A. County deputies ...
Case history; Prior: 85 Ill. 2d 376, 423 N.E.2d 887; cert. granted, 454 U.S. 1140 (1982).: Holding; The rigid "two-pronged test" under Aguilar and Spinelli for determining whether an informant's tip establishes probable cause for issuance of a warrant is abandoned, and the "totality of the circumstances" approach that traditionally has informed probable cause determinations is substituted in ...
The usual definition of the probable cause standard includes “a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person’s belief that certain facts are probably true.” [6] Notably, this definition does not require that the person making the recognition must hold a public office or have public authority, which allows the ...
In Aguilar v.Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964), the Court said: [T]he magistrate must be informed of some of the underlying circumstances relied on by the person providing the information and some of the underlying circumstances from which the affiant concluded that the informant, whose identity was not disclosed, was creditable or his information reliable.
Between 2021 and 2024, the county alleges, VAS transferred some of its assets to Pham, Do, and Mai, who then bought properties in Garden Grove, Buena Park, Santa Ana, Fountain Valley and Tustin.