enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Graham v. Connor - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_v._Connor

    Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court determined that an objective reasonableness standard should apply to a civilian's claim that law enforcement officials used excessive force in the course of making an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of his or her person.

  3. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bivens_v._Six_Unknown...

    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.

  4. Brinegar v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinegar_v._United_States

    Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160 (1949), was a United States Supreme Court case employing the "reasonableness test" in warrantless searches.The Court held that while the police need not always be factually correct in conducting a warrantless search, such a search must always be reasonable.

  5. Tennessee v. Garner - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

    Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), is a civil case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, the officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the ...

  6. Kingsley v. Hendrickson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsley_v._Hendrickson

    Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (2015), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held in a 5–4 decision that a pretrial detainee must prove only that force used by police is excessive according to an objective standard, not that a police officer was subjectively aware that the force used was unreasonable.

  7. United States v. Leon - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Leon

    Judges and magistrates are not adjuncts to law enforcement officials and as such are neutral and have no stake in the outcome of criminal prosecutions. The suppression of evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant should be ordered only on a case-by-case basis and only in those instances where exclusion would promote the purposes of the ...

  8. Alexander v. Sandoval - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_v._Sandoval

    Case history; Prior: Sandoval v. Hagan, 7 F. Supp. 2d 1234 (M.D. Ala. 1998), aff'd, 197 F.3d 484 (11th Cir. 1999), cert. granted, 530 U.S. 1305 (2000). Subsequent: 268 F.3d 1065 (11th Cir. 2001). Holding; There is no private right of action to enforce disparate-impact regulations promulgated under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Court ...

  9. Pierson v. Ray - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson_v._Ray

    Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court first introduced the justification for qualified immunity for police officers from being sued for civil rights violations under Section 1983, by arguing that "[a] policeman's lot is not so unhappy that he must choose between being charged with dereliction of duty if he does not arrest when he had ...