Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court refuses to tighten the rules when police seize cars.
Seized assets can be used for police office expenses and new equipment such as vehicles. [24] The profit motive, in which police can keep 90% or more of profits, "forms the rotten core of forfeiture abuse". [7]
A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that authorities do not have to provide a quick hearing when they seize cars and other property used in drug crimes, even when the property belongs to so ...
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday reinforced the power of law enforcement authorities to retain seized property belonging to people not charged with a crime, ruling in favor of Alabama officials ...
Case history; Prior: People v. Acevedo, 216 Cal.App.3d 586, 265 Cal.Rptr. 23 (App. 4th Dist. 1989): Holding; Police, in a search extending only to a container within an automobile, may search the container without a warrant where they have probable cause to believe that it holds contraband or evidence.
Wyoming v. Houghton, 526 U.S. 295 (1999), is a United States Supreme Court case which held that absent exigency, the warrantless search of a passenger's container capable of holding the object of a search for which there is probable cause is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution because it is justified under the automobile exception as an effect of the car.
The assets that are forfeited for criminal and civil offenses are used "to put more cops on the street", according to former United States President George H. W. Bush. [27] [failed verification] The assets are dispersed among the law enforcement community for things such as paying the attorneys involved in the forfeiture case, police vehicles ...
The plaintiffs each had their property seized by D.C.'s Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). Five of the plaintiffs were arrested during a Black Lives Matter protest in the Adams Morgan ...