Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Ohio v. Robinette, 519 U.S. 33 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not require police officers to inform a motorist at the end of a traffic stop that they are free to go before seeking permission to search the motorist's car.
Ohio v. Robinette: 519 U.S. 33 (1996) informing motorists that a traffic stop has ended and the motorist is "free to go" is not required under the Fourth Amendment: Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis: 519 U.S. 61 (1996) diversity of citizenship must exist at the time of entry of judgment M.L.B. v. S.L.J. 519 U.S. 102 (1996)
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.
As decided in Ohio v. Robinette (1996), after an officer returns the driver's identification, there is no requirement that the officer inform the driver of his or her freedom to leave; therefore, although the encounter has changed to a consensual encounter, questioning can continue, including a request to search the vehicle. [34]
Ohio v. Robinette, 519 U.S. 33 (1996) The Fourth Amendment does not require police officers to inform a motorist at the end of a traffic stop that they are free to go before seeking permission to search the motorist's car. Board of Education v.
Lindh v. Murphy; List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 516; List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 517; List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 518; List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 519; Lockheed Corp. v. Spink; Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc.
Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833 (1998), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States involving police action in a high-speed car chase. Background
The Illinois Appellate Court reversed Wardlow’s conviction, concluding that the gun should have been suppressed because Officer Nolan did not have reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigative stop pursuant to Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). 287 Ill. App. 3d 367, 678 N. E. 2d 65 (1997). [1]