Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that upheld the warrantless searches of an automobile, which is known as the automobile exception. The case has also been cited as widening the scope of search.
In Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925), the Supreme Court upheld the warrantless searches of an automobile, which is known as the automobile exception. The case has been cited as widening the scope of warrantless search.
United States v. Ninety-Five Barrels (More or Less) Alleged Apple Cider Vinegar: 265 U.S. 438 (1924) legality of misleading but factually accurate packaging statements under the Pure Food and Drug Act: Carroll v. United States: 267 U.S. 132 (1925) whether police searches of automobiles without a warrant violate the Fourth Amendment: Samuels v ...
The motor vehicle exception was first established by the United States Supreme Court in 1925, in Carroll v. United States. [1] [2] The motor vehicle exception allows officers to search a vehicle without a search warrant if they have probable cause to believe that evidence or contraband is in the vehicle. [3]
[1] March 2 – In an appeal originating in a Prohibition era bootlegging case, Carroll v. United States is decided in the Supreme Court, affirming the motor vehicle exception, that a warrantless search of an automobile does not contravene the Fourth Amendment, subject to probable cause and exigent circumstances. [2]
Much of this case is derived from the precedent set in Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925), where the Supreme Court ruled that police officers may make a warrantless search of an automobile if they have probable cause to suspect that it contains contraband. This is known as the "automobile exception" to the Fourth Amendment's warrant ...
In the 1925 Supreme Court case Carroll et al. v. United States, George Carroll and John Kiro were indicted and convicted for carrying "spirituous liquor" in contravention of the National Prohibition Act. Police officers had followed the defendants after their car passed their patrol car and after they caught up with them, they stopped them.
In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that the circumstances provided not only probable cause to arrest, but also under Carroll v. United States , 267 U.S. 132 (1925) and Chambers v. Maroney , 399 U.S. 42 (1970), probable cause to seize the incriminating items without a warrant.