Search for: "Whren v. United States"
Results 61 - 80
of 148
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2014, 2:03 pm
The Court held in Whren v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 5:51 am
But as the Appellate Division recognized, the United States Supreme Court has consistently held that an arresting officer’s subjective intent, however determined, offers no basis for negating an objectively valid arrest. [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 2:43 pm
In the 1996 case of Whren v. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 10:09 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Sep 2014, 4:17 am
Can you say Whren? [read post]
5 May 2014, 5:45 pm
California and United States v. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 12:55 pm
In United States v. [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 2:25 pm
The Court left this issue open in United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2014, 6:00 am
United States, by Judith V. [read post]
20 Jan 2014, 5:51 pm
In Whren v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 2:42 pm
As the Court of Appeals has explained, where a police officer has probable cause to believe that the driver of an automobile has committed a traffic violation, a stop does not violate the state or federal constitutions and neither the primary motivation of the officer nor a determination of what a reasonable traffic officer would have done under the circumstances is relevant akin to People v Robinson and Whren v United States. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 3:50 am
Gaona–Gomez admitted he was a Mexican national and was in the United States “without the proper immigration documents. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 9:01 pm
Last week, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Maryland v. [read post]
16 Apr 2013, 9:01 pm
United States in 1967. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 11:46 pm
The case is United States v. [read post]
3 Aug 2012, 12:31 pm
United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996); United States v. [read post]
30 Jul 2012, 7:34 am
United States (1996), and the more recently decided Arizona v. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 9:02 am
United States, a case in which the U.S. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 2:59 am
United States, 517 U. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 11:25 am
He pointed to Whren v. [read post]
