Search for: ""Horton v. California" OR "496 U.S. 128"" Results 1 - 20 of 24
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Dec 2010, 11:21 pm by Orin Kerr
California (1990) 496 U.S. 128 [“[t]he deputy’s use of his flashlight to illuminate the interior of the handbag is of no constitutional significance”]; United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2007, 8:48 am
California, 496 U.S. 128 (1990)] Court between the right to merely observe an object (here, from off the premises) and the right to seize that object (on the premises). [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 7:50 am
California (1990) 496 U.S. 128, 136-137; Kraft, supra, 23 Cal.4th at p. 1043; Nicolaus, supra, 54 Cal.3d at p. 575.) [read post]
27 Sep 2009, 8:19 am
California, 496 U.S. 128, 136-37, 110 S.Ct. 2301, 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990). [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 5:45 am by Bob Farb
California, 496 U.S. 128 (1990)), that the discovery of evidence in plain view must be inadvertent. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 9:50 am
California, 496 U.S. 128 (1990), I explained that the officers in Varner also could have seized the pipe under the plain view exception. [read post]