Search for: "Pb v. Pc"
Results 221 - 240
of 363
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Oct 2009, 11:26 pm
September 29, 2009).* State and federal officers may have collective knowledge for PC for a vehicle search. [read post]
29 Sep 2009, 4:40 am
September 21, 2009).* Police had PC for defendant’s stop in his car. [read post]
27 Sep 2009, 11:58 pm
State v. [read post]
27 Sep 2009, 8:08 am
United States v. [read post]
27 Sep 2009, 7:27 am
Inevitable discovery supported seizure from a car that the court found no PC for an automobile search. [read post]
26 Sep 2009, 6:36 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 5:37 am
A hidden compartment gave PC to search. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 5:45 am
State v. [read post]
12 Sep 2009, 2:54 pm
John v. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 6:53 am
Officers had PC to believe that defendant was involved in hand-to-hand drug sales with cars that drove up. [read post]
5 Sep 2009, 8:01 am
LEXIS 725 (August 31, 2009).* Overtinted windows PC for stop. [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 4:31 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2009, 5:28 am
Dogs alert was PC for a search. [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 4:55 am
August 21, 2009) (unpublished).* A dog alert is PC in the 10th Cir., and the court declines to impose a requirement that there be a "final indication" by the dog. [read post]
26 Aug 2009, 5:45 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Aug 2009, 6:56 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 4:58 am
August 17, 2009).* Whether a protective sweep was justified was not required to be determined when ther was already PC for the search, relying on United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 5:01 am
Iowa June 10, 2009).* Officer's seeing what appeared to be crack cocaine in plain view in a car was PC to search it. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 4:39 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 6:37 am
It should be PC, but, whatever it is, the police had it here. [read post]
