When.com Web Search

  1. Ad

    related to: illegal search evidence california court rules that a bumblebee is a fish

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Chimel v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimel_v._California

    Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969), was a 1969 United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that police officers arresting a person at his home could not search the entire home without a search warrant, but that police may search the area within immediate reach of the person without a warrant. [1]

  3. California Endangered Species Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Endangered...

    In 2018, public interest groups petitioned to list four species of bumblebee as endangered in California, and this was initially approved; [10] however, in 2019 this decision was challenged by a petition filed in trial court, and the trial court granted the petition, agreeing with the plaintiffs that the law did not grant authority to list ...

  4. Ker v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ker_v._California

    The Court extended that holding in this case, addressing the standard for deciding what are the fruits of an illegal search in state criminal trials. Clark's opinion addressed “the specific question as to whether Mapp requires the exclusion of evidence in this case which the California District Court of Appeal has held to be lawfully seized ...

  5. Hill v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_v._California

    The trial court denied the motion on the basis that the officers acted in good faith. Although the prosecution's eyewitnesses were unable to identify him as one of the robbers, Hill was convicted on October 20, 1966. The California Court of Appeals reversed his conviction by arguing that the apartment search was unreasonable. [2] However, the ...

  6. Even when a police search is illegal, prosecutors may still ...

    www.aol.com/news/even-police-search-illegal...

    Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice Marla Luckert appears uncomfortable with how far federal courts have gone in allowing evidence from unconstitutional searches.

  7. 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 .

  8. AOL Mail

    mail.aol.com

    Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!

  9. Google has an illegal monopoly on search, judge rules. Here’s ...

    www.aol.com/google-loses-massive-antitrust...

    Google has violated US antitrust law with its search business, a federal judge ruled Monday, handing the tech giant a staggering court defeat with the potential to reshape how millions of ...