enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Illinois v. Gates - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_v._Gates

    Case history; Prior: 85 Ill. 2d 376, 423 N.E.2d 887; cert. granted, 454 U.S. 1140 (1982).: Holding; The rigid "two-pronged test" under Aguilar and Spinelli for determining whether an informant's tip establishes probable cause for issuance of a warrant is abandoned, and the "totality of the circumstances" approach that traditionally has informed probable cause determinations is substituted in ...

  3. South Dakota v. Opperman - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Opperman

    Furthermore, the court had already sanctioned an inventory search of an impounded car suspected to contain the service revolver of a fugitive Chicago police officer. [2] The search in this case was conducted according to standard police procedure, and no suggestion existed that the search was a pretext for an investigation.

  4. Motor vehicle exception - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception

    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]

  5. United States v. Ross - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Ross

    United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982), was a search and seizure case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States.The high court was asked to decide if a legal warrantless search of an automobile allows closed containers found in the vehicle (specifically, in the trunk) to be searched as well.

  6. Ybarra v. Illinois - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ybarra_v._Illinois

    Case history; Prior: 58 Ill. App. 3d 57, 373 N. E. 2d 1013: Holding; When a search warrant specifies the person or people named in the warrant to be searched and the things to be seized, there is no authority to search others not named in the warrant, unless the warrant specifically mentions that the unnamed parties are involved in criminal activity or exigent circumstances are clearly shown.

  7. California v. Greenwood - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Greenwood

    California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home. [1]

  8. California v. Acevedo - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Acevedo

    California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court, which interpreted the Carroll doctrine to provide one rule to govern all automobile searches.

  9. List of consent to search case law articles - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_consent_to_search...

    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.