When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the...

    The Bill of Rights in the National Archives. The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights.It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets requirements for issuing warrants: warrants must be issued by a judge or magistrate, justified by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and must particularly describe the place to be ...

  3. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bivens_v._Six_Unknown...

    Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), was a case in which the US Supreme Court ruled that an implied cause of action existed for an individual whose Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizures had been violated by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.

  4. Across Kansas, police conduct illegal search and seizures ...

    www.aol.com/across-kansas-police-conduct-illegal...

    Kansas law enforcement have committed numerous violations of Fourth Amendment rights over the past decade, an investigation by The Star found. At least 25 times since 2014, courts either ruled ...

  5. Exclusionary rule - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule

    Even in a criminal case, the exclusionary rule does not simply bar the introduction of all evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendment. In Hudson v. Michigan, [30] Justice Scalia wrote for the U.S. Supreme Court: Suppression of evidence, however, has always been our last resort, not our first impulse.

  6. Kaufman v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaufman_v._United_States

    Kaufman v. United States, 394 U.S. 217 (1969), was a United States Supreme Court case decided in 1969. In a majority opinion authored by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., the Court held that criminal defendants could bring claims that evidence against them was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution in a collateral attack under the federal habeas corpus ...

  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. Arizona v. Evans - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_v._Evans

    The Fourth Amendment guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. The exclusionary rule is not derived from the Fourth Amendment, rather it is the judicial remedy for a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Although the exclusionary rule was originally implemented as a guard for privacy rights, after United States v.

  9. Elkins v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elkins_v._United_States

    Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 (1960), was a US Supreme Court decision that held the "silver platter doctrine", which allowed federal prosecutors to use evidence illegally gathered by state police, to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.