Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
2018 United States Supreme Court case Microsoft Corp. v. United States Supreme Court of the United States Argued February 27, 2018 Decided April 17, 2018 Full case name United States v. Microsoft Corp. Docket no. 17-2 Citations 584 U.S. ___ (more) 138 S.Ct. 1186 Case history Prior Microsoft Corp. v. United States, S.D.N.Y. reversed, warrant quashed, and civil contempt ruling vacated (2nd Cir ...
A search warrant is a court order that a magistrate or judge issues to authorize law enforcement officers to conduct a search of a person, location, or vehicle for evidence of a crime and to confiscate any evidence they find. In most countries, a search warrant cannot be issued in aid of civil process.
A reverse search warrant is a type of search warrant used in the United States, in which law enforcement obtains a court order for information from technology companies to identify a group of people who may be suspects in a crime. They differ from traditional search warrants, which typically apply to specific individuals.
The redacted search warrant affidavit, along with a redacted copy of the legal brief that justified redactions to the affidavit, [n] were unsealed and made public on August 26. [194] [195] The New York Times, The Washington Post, and CNN released annotated versions of the search warrant affidavit as well. [196] [197] [4]
The lead investigator had executed the search warrant after receiving a sign-off from Chemung County Judge Richard W. Rich Jr., according to court documents reviewed by the New York Post.
United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that installing a Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking device on a vehicle and using the device to monitor the vehicle's movements constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment.
In June 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement officers need a search warrant before accessing information from internet service providers about users’ identities. The context behind this 8-0 ruling is an adolescent Saskatchewan man charged with possessing and distributing child pornography. [ 14 ]