Ads
related to: warrantless arrest affidavit meaning in the state of georgia pdf file download
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
When a warrantless arrest occurs based on information provided by a confidential informant or anonymous source, for the arrest to be lawful, the police must establish that the information relied on in making the arrest meets the same two basic elements described above. At a post arraignment hearing the police must:
Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981), is a United States Supreme Court case which held that, based on the Fourth Amendment, a police officer may not conduct a warrantless search of a third party's home in an attempt to apprehend the subject of an arrest warrant, absent consent or exigent circumstances.
a credible complaint has been made or a reasonable suspicion exists, and an arrest is necessary to prevent further criminal activity or promote the criminal investigation; a person has been declared a criminal by an authorized state authority. Section 35 specifically bars arrests of persons who are infirm or over the age of 65 without a 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.
Georgia v. Randolph , 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that without a search warrant , police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident consents to the search while another resident objects.
The Official Code of Georgia Annotated or OCGA is the compendium of all laws in the state of Georgia. Like other state codes in the United States, its legal interpretation is subject to the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, and the state's constitution. It is to the state what the U.S. Code is to the federal ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Case history; Prior: Franks v. State, 373 A.2d 578 (Del. 1977): Subsequent: Franks v. State, 398 A.2d 783 (Del. 1979): Holding; Where a warrant affidavit contains a statement, necessary to the finding of probable cause, that is demonstrated to be both false and included by an affiant knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, the warrant is not valid.