When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Supreme Court rules owners of seized cars are not entitled to ...

    www.aol.com/news/supreme-court-rules-innocent...

    Instead, the justices in a 6-3 decision said the Constitution requires a “timely hearing” to consider whether the police had properly arrested the driver and seized the vehicle, but that may ...

  3. Windshield obstruction laws - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windshield_obstruction_laws

    Pennsylvania windshield obstructions are covered under Title 75, §4524 : "Obstruction on front windshield.--No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any sign, poster or other nontransparent material upon the front windshield which materially obstructs, obscures or impairs the driver's clear view of the highway or any intersecting highway except an inspection certificate, sticker ...

  4. Divided Supreme Court rules no quick hearing required when ...

    www.aol.com/news/divided-supreme-court-rules-no...

    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 ...

  5. US Supreme Court reinforces police power in seized vehicle ruling

    www.aol.com/news/us-supreme-court-reinforces...

    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 ...

  6. Terry stop - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

    When police stop and search a pedestrian, this is commonly known as a stop and frisk. When police stop an automobile, this is known as a traffic stop. If the police stop a motor vehicle on minor infringements in order to investigate other suspected criminal activity, this is known as a pretextual stop. Additional rules apply to stops that occur ...

  7. Wyoming v. Houghton - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_v._Houghton

    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.

  8. Police Cannot Seize Property Indefinitely After an Arrest ...

    www.aol.com/news/police-cannot-seize-property...

    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 ...

  9. Motor vehicle exception - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception

    San Francisco Police searching a vehicle after a stop in 2008. The motor vehicle exception is a legal rule in the United States that modifies the normal probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and, when applicable, allows a police officer to search a motor vehicle without a search warrant.