Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
You do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your belongings, including your car. Refusing consent may not stop the officer from carrying out the search, but it could help preserve your ...
While the police officer must have reasonable suspicion to detain a person, the officer has no obligation to inform the person what that suspicion was. The only time the officer would have to articulate the suspicion is when the person was arrested, and the person later challenged the validity of the stop in court.
The Court noted that Congress early observed the need for a search warrant in non-border search situations, [2] and Congress always recognized "a necessary difference" between searches of buildings and vehicles "for contraband goods, where it is not practical to secure a warrant, because the vehicle can be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant must be sought."
Getting a search warrant is a process that begins in a police department with an application and ends with a specific and restricted list of items allowed to be seized at a given premises.
Police can also search your phone with your consent. In Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, California ruled that law enforcement can search your phone without a warrant if you voluntarily agree to the search.
Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court criminal law decision holding that a police officer ordering a person out of a car following a traffic stop and conducting a pat-down to check for weapons did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.