Search for: "Gant v. State"
Results 161 - 180
of 556
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
CA6: In SI, it is how defendant could have got to part of car searched, not how officer actually did
7 May 2011, 4:46 am
United States v. [read post]
8 Apr 2010, 3:31 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 11:52 am
" Katz v.United States, 389 U. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 4:41 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 4:41 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 5:34 pm
For example, minor defects in warrants do not warrant suppression, see United States v. [read post]
15 Jun 2021, 1:12 pm
The court distinguished United States v. [read post]
9 Oct 2010, 3:21 pm
United States v. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 5:36 am
State v. [read post]
19 Jul 2009, 8:26 pm
United States v. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 7:29 am
State v. [read post]
11 Mar 2009, 4:03 pm
In Hejinian v. [read post]
25 Feb 2008, 7:04 am
Gant (07-542). [read post]
6 Jan 2010, 6:10 am
United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2010, 3:22 pm
State v. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 3:50 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 5:34 am
People v. [read post]
23 Aug 2014, 8:56 am
In Smallwood v. [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 4:52 am
Gant (discussed here), which essentially overruled the ”bright-line” rule established in Belton v. [read post]
15 May 2009, 8:57 am
The state court held that Gant could not have reached his car during the search and posed no safety threat to the officers, making a vehicle search unreasonable under the “reaching-distance rule. [read post]
