Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
"Stop and identify" laws in different states that appear to be nearly identical may be different in effect because of interpretations by state courts. For example, California "stop and identify" law, Penal Code §647(e) had wording [37] [38] [39] similar to the Nevada law upheld in Hiibel, but a California appellate court, in People v.
Pages in category "Ohio state case law" The following 11 pages are in this category, out of 11 total. This list may not reflect recent changes. C. City of Norwood v ...
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the court ruled that it is constitutional for American police to "stop and frisk" a person they reasonably suspect to be armed and involved in a crime.
(The Center Square) – The U.S. Department of Justice told the Drug Enforcement Administration to suspend consensual searches at airports and other mass transit facilities after hearing about ...
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!
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the exclusionary rule, which prevents a prosecutor from using evidence that was obtained by violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, applies to states as well as the federal government.
Adding mobile IDs to the list of approved voter identification forms would require a law change. "Right now, it's not a use-case. We're not suggesting that it happen, we're not against it happening.
Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89 (1964), is a United States Supreme Court decision concerning evidence obtained as part of an unlawful arrest. Reversing the Ohio Supreme Court's decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Ohio police arrested defendant without probable cause, so the criminally-punishable evidence found on his person during an incidental search was inadmissible.