enow.com Web Search

Search results

1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network

2. Search and seizure law in Pennsylvania - Wikipedia

   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_and_seizure_law_in...

   The US Supreme Court's interpretation of the Fourth Amendment do not control the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's interpretation of the protections under Article I § 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Edmunds, 586 A.2d 887 (1991). In fact, Federal Fourth Amendment decisions establish the constitutional floor, but ...

3. Open-fields doctrine - Wikipedia

   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-fields_doctrine

   The open-fields doctrine (also open-field doctrine or open-fields rule), in the U.S. law of criminal procedure, is the legal doctrine that a "warrantless search of the area outside a property owner's curtilage" does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. However, "unless there is some other legal basis for the ...

4. Pennsylvania warrant unsealed: Here’s what police seized from ...

   www.aol.com/pennsylvania-warrant-unsealed-police...

   A search warrant released Tuesday contains details of the early-morning search on Dec. 30 at the home of Bryan Kohberger’s parents, where he was arrested.

5. New Bryan Kohberger search warrant reveals items seized ... - AOL

   www.aol.com/bryan-kohberger-search-warrant...

   The search warrant application was filed in Pennsylvania’s Monroe County court on 29 December, the day before Mr Kohberger’s arrest. It approves a search of the family residence, the adjacent ...

6. Plain view doctrine - Wikipedia

   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_view_doctrine

   The officer must be lawfully present where he or she sees the item. For example, an officer may not enter a suspect's home without a warrant and rely on the plain view doctrine. However, if an officer is inside a suspect's home under an unrelated warrant, he or she may rely on the plain view doctrine, subject to the doctrine's other ...

7. Oliver v. United States - Wikipedia

   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_v._United_States

   Id at 178. The Court also cited practical considerations as weighing on its decision, since open fields "usually are accessible to the public," and "no trespassing" signs are generally ineffective at "bar[ring] the public from viewing open fields in rural areas," and "the public and police lawfully may survey lands from the air." Id at 178-179.