Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Act is current Illinois state law in the Illinois Compiled Statutes, 725 ILCS 210. [1] In cases where questions have been asked about an Illinois law enforcement team and the prosecutor of jurisdiction has day-to-day ties with that law enforcement team, ILSAAP may be asked to conduct an independent review.
Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights.
In an effort to prevent such abuses, Congress passed a law in 1831 limiting the application of the summary contempt procedures to offenses committed in or near the court. A new section, which survives today as the Omnibus Clause, was added to punish contempts committed outside of the court, but only after indictment and trial by jury. [19] [20]
Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980), was a United States Supreme Court case that determined "seizure" occurs when an officer uses displays of authority to detain a person. [ 2 ] The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit heard the appeal of Ms. Sylvia Mendenhall as pertaining to Ms. Mendenhall's alleged unconstitutional seizure by two ...
Whoever, being required in the name of the state by any officer of the Florida Highway Patrol, police officer, beverage enforcement agent, or watchman, neglects or refuses to assist him or her in the execution of his or her office in a criminal case, or in the preservation of the peace, or the apprehending or securing of any person for a breach ...
The United States Constitution contains several provisions regarding criminal procedure, including: Article Three, along with Amendments Five, Six, Eight, and Fourteen. Such cases have come to comprise a substantial portion of the Supreme Court's docket.
A defendant may also not have to demonstrate prejudice if the attorney made a key decision about the case against the client's wishes, including whether to plead guilty (McCoy v. Louisiana), whether to waive the right to a jury trial, whether to forgo an appeal, or whether the defendant wanted to testify on their own behalf. [27]
However, many states have "stop and identify" laws that explicitly require a person detained under the conditions of Terry to identify themselves to police, and in some cases, to provide additional information. Before Hiibel, whether a detainee could be arrested and prosecuted for refusing to disclose their name was an unresolved issue.