Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Emergency aid doctrine is an exception to the Fourth Amendment, allowing warrantless entry to premises if exigent circumstances make it necessary. [8] A number of exceptions are classified under the general heading of criminal enforcement: where evidence of a suspected crime is in danger of being lost; where the police officers are in hot pursuit; where there is a probability that a suspect ...
Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (2013), was a case decided by United States Supreme Court, on appeal from the Supreme Court of Missouri, regarding exceptions to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution under exigent circumstances.
During the first Trump administration, there were at least 63 planned and five exigent ICE arrests at or near a sensitive location, according to ICE data covering the period from Oct. 1, 2017 ...
Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452 (2011), was a decision by the US Supreme Court, which held that warrantless searches conducted in police-created exigent circumstances do not violate the Fourth Amendment as long as the police did not create the exigency by violating or threatening to violate the Fourth Amendment.
Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case involving the exigent circumstances exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. The Court ruled that police may enter a home without a warrant if they have an objectively reasonable basis for believing that an occupant is or is about to be seriously ...
“I think those are the mitigating or exigent circumstances, and that you had an inexperienced board trying to comply with the law,” he said. Origins of the Sunshine Law dispute.
Lange v. California, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the exigent circumstances requirement related to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that firefighters can not enter a burned premises (in this case, a furniture store) to retrieve evidence of arson barring a search warrant, evidence of exigent circumstances, evidence of abandonment, or consent.