Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that helped to establish an implied "right to privacy" in U.S. law in the form of mere possession of obscene materials.
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), was a case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that an implied cause of action existed for an individual whose Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizures had been violated by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
In cases where property is forfeited by default, up to 70% of proceeds go to law enforcement. In cases where forfeiture is contested, up to 100% of proceeds go to law enforcement. [92] Utah Prosecutors required to provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. [93]
Many circuit courts have said that law enforcement can hold your property for as long as they want. D.C.’s ... that the seizures at issue, though lawful at their inception, later came to ...
Standing in cases in which plaintiffs assert interest in aesthetic or recreational interest in property (in this case, Mineral King area) Wisconsin v. Yoder: 406 U.S. 205 (1972) Freedom of religion, high school education Apodaca v. Oregon: 406 U.S. 404 (1972) State juries may convict a defendant by less than unanimity Jackson v. Indiana: 406 U ...
Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that without a search warrant, police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident consents to the search while another resident objects.
Bond moved to suppress the "brick" of methamphetamine on the basis that the agent had conducted an illegal search of the bag when squeezing it. [4] He claimed that this was a violation of the Federal Constitution's Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. [4] The district court denied the motion, and found Bond guilty ...
Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1]