Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
One is the "Consent to Search" law which requires an officer to inform someone they have the right to deny a search and to make sure that person understands that right. The other is the "NYPD ID" law, which requires the officer, in certain situations, to hand out business cards with their name, rank, badge number and command.
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 Court distinguished this case from the "co-occupant consent rule" established in United
Illinois v. Rodriguez (1990) - search valid if police reasonably believe consent given by owner; Florida v. Bostick (1991) - not "free to leave" but "free to decline" on bus; Florida v. Jimeno (1991) - can request officer to limit scope of search; Ohio v. Robinette (1996) - do not have to inform motorist is free to go; United States v.
Fernandez v. California, 571 U.S. 292 (2014), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that explored the limits of Georgia v. Randolph, a 2006 case that held that consent to search a dwelling is invalid in the presence of an objecting co-resident. [1]
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled that in a case involving a consent search, although knowledge of a right to refuse consent is a factor in determining whether a grant of consent to a search was voluntary, the state does not need to prove that the person who granted consent to search knew of the right to refuse consent under the Fourth ...
Cover of volume 1 of the 2007 edition of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated. Pursuant to the state constitution, the Georgia General Assembly has enacted legislation.Its session laws are published in the official Georgia Laws, [1] which in turn have been codified in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (O.C.G.A.). [1]
Twelve years later, Georgia's Supreme Court would, however, find that the same law upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court was unconstitutional on state constitutional grounds, at least as applied to oral sex with persons over the age of consent (Powell v. Georgia, S98A0755, 270 Ga. 327, 510 S.E. 2d 18 (1998)).
The Georgia Bill of Rights was ratified, along with the Georgia Constitution of 1861, soon after the State of Georgia seceded from the Union on 18 January 1861. [1] Prior to the creation of the Bill of Rights, Georgia's previous four Constitutions protected only a relative few civil liberties . [ 1 ]