Search for: ""Indianapolis v. Edmond" OR "531 U.S. 32""
Results 21 - 31
of 31
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2010, 7:24 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32. 44 (2000) ('[T]he Fourth Amendment would almost certainly permit an appropriately tailored roadblock set up to ... catch a dangerous criminal who is likely to flee by way of a particular route. [read post]
11 Jul 2009, 8:51 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 48 (2000) (“Because the primary purpose of the Indianapolis checkpoint program is ultimately indistinguishable from the general interest in crime control, the checkpoints violate the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
11 May 2009, 1:57 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 37 (2000); Abel v. [read post]
8 Jan 2009, 5:26 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 37-38 (2000); Michigan Dept. of State Police v. [read post]
4 Sep 2008, 11:02 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 44, 121 S. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 10:59 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 44 (2000) for the proposition that roadblocks that are set up solely to trap drug offenders have been found to violate the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 11:45 pm
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 40, 121 S. [read post]
1 Mar 2008, 5:05 pm
Edmond (2000) 531 U.S. 32, 54 (dis. opn. of Rehnquist, C. [read post]
20 Sep 2007, 6:45 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 37 (2000) ("A search or seizure is ordinarily unreasonable in the absence of individualized suspicion of wrongdoing. [read post]
16 Sep 2007, 10:18 am
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 47 (2000), wherein the Supreme Court of the United States held that "[w]hen law enforcement authorities pursue primarily general crime control purposes at checkpoints ... stops can only be justified by some quantum of individualized suspicion. [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 1:30 pm
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 37 (2000). [read post]
