When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Byrd v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byrd_v._United_States

    Byrd's lawyers attempted to have the search of the car dismissed as evidence, as it violated Byrd's rights against unreasonable searches under the Fourth Amendment defined under the motor vehicle exception, but the judge denied that he had such rights since by the Budget rental contract, Byrd was not an authorized driver. Byrd pleaded guilty to ...

  3. Illinois v. Caballes - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_v._Caballes

    Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that the use of a drug-sniffing police dog during a routine traffic stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, even if the initial infraction is unrelated to drug offenses.

  4. Brendlin v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendlin_v._California

    In the early morning hours of November 27, 2001, a Sutter County deputy sheriff and his partner, who was a cadet at the time, stopped a car in which Bruce Brendlin was riding. The car's registration had expired, but the owner had applied for a renewal, and a valid temporary registration permit was properly affixed to the car. Nevertheless, the ...

  5. South Dakota v. Opperman - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Opperman

    Opperman was sentenced to 14 days in jail and fined $100. He appealed, and the Supreme Court of South Dakota reversed his conviction on the grounds that the inventory search was an unreasonable one under the Fourth Amendment. At South Dakota's request, the Supreme Court agreed to review the case.

  6. Plumhoff v. Rickard - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plumhoff_v._Rickard

    Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U.S. 765 (2014), is a United States Supreme Court case involving the use of force by police officers during high-speed car chases.After first holding that it had jurisdiction to hear the case, the Court held that the conduct of the police officers involved in the case did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches ...

  7. Amendments to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amendments_to_the_Voting...

    House agreed to Senate amendment on June 17, 1970 Signed into law by President Richard M. Nixon on June 22, 1970 Anticipating the expiration of the Act's special provisions in 1970, Congress held extensive hearings on whether the Act should be amended and its special provisions reauthorized.

  8. Coolidge v. New Hampshire - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coolidge_v._New_Hampshire

    Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the Fourth Amendment and the automobile exception.. The state sought to justify the search of a car owned by Edward Coolidge, suspected of killing 14-year-old Pamela Mason in January 1964, on three theories: automobile exception, search incident to arrest and plain view.

  9. United States v. Ross - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Ross

    United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982), was a search and seizure case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States.The high court was asked to decide if a legal warrantless search of an automobile allows closed containers found in the vehicle (specifically, in the trunk) to be searched as well.