Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A series of protests at Ohio State University by pro-Palestinian demonstrators occurred on-campus in response to the Israel-Palestine conflict beginning on October 7, 2023. A solidarity encampment was constructed on OSU's South Oval on April 25, 2024, during which there were at least 36 arrests, [1] making for the largest en masse arrests on campus since the 1969–1970 Vietnam War protests.
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 ...
The Columbus Division of Police (CPD) is the primary law enforcement agency for the city of Columbus, Ohio, in the United States. It is the largest police department in Ohio, and among the twenty-five largest in the United States. [2] [3] It is composed of twenty precincts and numerous other investigative and support units. Chief Elaine Bryant ...
A sheriff’s office investigating a report of a possible shooting that prompted a lockdown at Ohio’s Muskingum University determined Monday night that no shooting occurred. The Muskingum County ...
The reasonable expectation of privacy is crucial in distinguishing a legitimate, reasonable police search and seizure from an unreasonable one. A "search" occurs for purposes of the Fourth Amendment when the Government violates a person's "reasonable expectation of privacy". [3] In Katz v.
Illinois v. Rodriguez (1990) - search valid if police reasonably believe consent given by owner; Florida v. Bostick (1991) - not "free to leave" but "free to decline" on bus; Florida v. Jimeno (1991) - can request officer to limit scope of search; Ohio v. Robinette (1996) - do not have to inform motorist is free to go; United States v.
Fernandez v. California, 571 U.S. 292 (2014), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that explored the limits of Georgia v. Randolph, a 2006 case that held that consent to search a dwelling is invalid in the presence of an objecting co-resident. [1]
United States v. Drayton, 536 U.S. 194 (2002), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court clarified the applicability of Fourth Amendment protections to searches and seizures that occur on buses, as well as the function of consent during searches by law enforcement. [1]