Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court refuses to tighten the rules when police seize cars.
Seized assets can be used for police office expenses and new equipment such as vehicles. [24] The profit motive, in which police can keep 90% or more of profits, "forms the rotten core of forfeiture abuse". [7]
Lich Vu, 70, was violently thrown onto the pavement during an argument with Oklahoma City Police Department officer Joseph Gibson at the scene of a collision on Oct. 27, troubling footage shared ...
For a law-enforcement officer to legally seize an item, the officer must have probable cause to believe that the item is evidence of a crime or is contraband. The police may not move objects in order to obtain a better view, and the officer may not be in a location unlawfully. These limitations were detailed in the case of Arizona v.
A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that authorities do not have to provide a quick hearing when they seize cars and other property used in drug crimes, even when the property belongs to so ...
San Francisco Police searching a vehicle after a stop in 2008. The motor vehicle exception is a legal rule in the United States that modifies the normal probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and, when applicable, allows a police officer to search a motor vehicle without a search warrant.
Search incident to a lawful arrest, commonly known as search incident to arrest (SITA) or the Chimel rule (from Chimel v.California), is a U.S. legal principle that allows police to perform a warrantless search of an arrested person, and the area within the arrestee’s immediate control, in the interest of officer safety, the prevention of escape, and the preservation of evidence.
Body camera video shows an Oklahoma City police officer forcefully taking down and handcuffing a 71-year-old driver after a traffic stop last month.