enow.com Web Search

Search results

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

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California

    Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), [1] is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.

  3. Ker v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ker_v._California

    Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23 (1963), was a case before the United States Supreme Court, which incorporated the Fourth Amendment's protections against illegal search and seizure. The case was decided on June 10, 1963, by a vote of 5–4.

  4. Reasonable expectation of privacy (United States) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_expectation_of...

    Objective expectation of privacy: legitimate and generally recognized by society and perhaps protected by law. Places where individuals expect privacy include residences, hotel rooms, [1] or public places that have been provided by businesses or the public sector to ensure privacy, including public restrooms, private portions of jailhouses, [2 ...

  5. Police Cannot Seize Property Indefinitely After an Arrest ...

    www.aol.com/news/police-cannot-seize-property...

    The Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures extends to the length of a seizure, a federal court ruled last week, significantly restricting how long law enforcement ...

  6. People v. Diaz - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Diaz

    People v. Diaz, 51 Cal. 4th 84, 244 P.3d 501, 119 Cal. Rptr. 3d 105 (Cal. January 3, 2011) was a Supreme Court of California case, which held that police are not required to obtain a warrant to search information contained within a cell phone in a lawful arrest. [1]

  7. Stoner v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoner_v._California

    He waived extradition to California, where he was indicted, tried and convicted. Since he had two prior convictions he was found to be a habitual criminal and sentenced to a long prison term. [2] On appeal to the Second District, he argued that the search of his hotel room was unconstitutional since the police did not have a search warrant. In ...

  8. California v. Ciraolo - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Ciraolo

    California v. Ciraolo , 476 U.S. 207 (1986), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that aerial observation of a person's backyard by police, even if done without a search warrant , does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution .

  9. California has a history of racist land seizures. Will ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/california-history-racist-land...

    The bills turn the spotlight on a phenomenon that is woven into the Golden State's history, said California state Sen. Steven Bradford, a Democrat from Gardena who authored three of the pending bills.