Search for: "The PEOPLE v. Riley"
Results 281 - 300
of 470
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Apr 2015, 1:04 pm
United States (2015) Riley v. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 4:55 pm
Thus the Court has more recently applied the Fourth Amendment to cell phones(last year’s decision in Riley v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 11:15 am
Thankfully Santana was not harassed for wielding his cell phone, but many people have been: officers have ordered people to stop recording, seized their devices, deleted the photos or video/audio recordings, and even arrested people. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 6:06 am
Riley v. [read post]
22 Mar 2015, 3:37 pm
The problem was based on United States v. [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 6:33 am
People v. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 12:32 pm
In the October 2013 term, the United States Supreme Court was asked in Riley v. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 12:32 pm
In the October 2013 term, the United States Supreme Court was asked in Riley v. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 7:14 am
It is said that the law cannot keep pace with society, evolving about twenty years slower than the culture, but even the United States Supreme Court has caught on to the uniqueness of the modern “cell phone,” calling the devices “minicomputers that also happen to have the capacity to be used as a telephone” in a landmark case last year called Riley v. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 9:06 am
Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Riley v. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 8:47 am
See Witkoff v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 1:15 pm
Saxe v. [read post]
27 Jan 2015, 12:45 pm
Jones that Americans’ location history enjoys significant privacy protections, and in Riley v. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 11:25 pm
See, e.g., Riley v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 7:22 am
While recent cases like Riley v. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 2:19 pm
However, late in 2014, in People v. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 7:04 am
Oakley, John V. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 4:33 am
’” Riley v. [read post]
14 Dec 2014, 9:52 am
The Supreme Court of the United States has since clarified this position in Riley v. [read post]
12 Dec 2014, 12:24 pm
Supreme Court recently reaffirmed in Riley v. [read post]
