enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. California v. Hodari D. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Hodari_D.

    California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (1991), was a United States Supreme Court case where the Court held that a fleeing suspect is not "seized" under the terms of the Fourth Amendment unless the pursuing officers apply physical force to the suspect or the suspect submits to officers' demands to halt. [1]

  3. Schmerber v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmerber_v._California

    Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966), was a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court case in which the Court clarified the application of the Fourth Amendment's protection against warrantless searches and the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination for searches that intrude into the human body.

  4. New Jersey v. T. L. O. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey_v._T._L._O.

    New Jersey v. T. L. O., [fn 1] 469 U.S. 325 (1985), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which established the standards by which a public school official can search a student in a school environment without a search warrant, and to what extent.

  5. Board of Education v. Earls - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_Education_v._Earls

    Board of Education v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002), was a case by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 5–4, that it does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for public schools to conduct mandatory drug testing on students participating in extracurricular activities.

  6. Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernonia_School_District...

    The Fourth Amendment only protects against intrusions upon legitimate expectations of privacy. Central to the Court's analysis, in this case, was the fact that the "subjects of the policy are (1) children, who (2) have been committed to the temporary custody of the State as a schoolmaster."

  7. Mapp v. Ohio - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mapp_v._Ohio

    Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.

  8. United States v. Robinson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Robinson

    United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that "in the case of a lawful custodial arrest a full search of the person is not only an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment, but is also a reasonable search under that Amendment."

  9. Brown v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Texas

    Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 (1979), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court determined that the defendant's arrest in El Paso, Texas, for a refusal to identify himself, after being seen and questioned in a high crime area, was not based on a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing and thus violated the Fourth Amendment.