Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
67/12/12 Oral Arguments Before The Us Supreme Court, Louis Stokes, Reuben M. Payne, Earl Warren, Hugo L. Black, William O. Douglas, John M. Harlan, William J. Brennan Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron R. White, Abe Fortas, Thurgood Marshall
67/12/12 Oral Arguments Before The Us Supreme Court, Louis Stokes, Reuben M. Payne, Earl Warren, Hugo L. Black, William O. Douglas, John M. Harlan, William J. Brennan Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron R. White, Abe Fortas, Thurgood Marshall
United States Supreme Court
Tuesday, December 12, 1967 oral arguments before the United States Supreme Court.
67/11/17 Brief Of Americans For Effective Law Enforcement, As Amicus Curiae, James R. Thompson
67/11/17 Brief Of Americans For Effective Law Enforcement, As Amicus Curiae, James R. Thompson
United States Supreme Court
"Despite the evidence which has been found of cases in which some police have abused field interrogation in some instances - evidence upon which the amicus relies so heavily - the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice unanimously recommends its adoption and use :
"The Commission believes that there is a definite need to authorize the police to stop suspects and possible witnesses of major crimes, to detain them for brief questioning if they will not voluntarily cooperate, and to search such suspects for dangerous weapons when such precaution is necessary."
This Amicus Curiae requests that the …
67/11/13 Brief Of National District Attorneys Assocation Amicus Curiae, In Support Of Respondent, Harry Wood, Harry E. Sondheim, Brenden T. Byrne, Charles Moylan Jr., Evelle T. Younger
67/11/13 Brief Of National District Attorneys Assocation Amicus Curiae, In Support Of Respondent, Harry Wood, Harry E. Sondheim, Brenden T. Byrne, Charles Moylan Jr., Evelle T. Younger
United States Supreme Court
No abstract provided.
67/11/03 Brief Of Respondent, Reuben M. Payne, John T. Corrigan
67/11/03 Brief Of Respondent, Reuben M. Payne, John T. Corrigan
United States Supreme Court
No abstract provided.
67/10/25 Brief Of Attorney General Of The State Of New York As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Appellees, Louis J. Lefkowitz, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, Maria L. Marcus, Brenda Soloff
67/10/25 Brief Of Attorney General Of The State Of New York As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Appellees, Louis J. Lefkowitz, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, Maria L. Marcus, Brenda Soloff
United States Supreme Court
New York Attorney General Amicus Curiae brief argues that police should be able to stop and question suspects whom they reasonably believe have or are planning to commit a felony.
67/10/18 Brief For Petitioner, Terry, Louis Stokes, Jack G. Day
67/10/18 Brief For Petitioner, Terry, Louis Stokes, Jack G. Day
United States Supreme Court
No abstract provided.
67/09/27 Brief Of American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union Of Ohio, And New York Civil Liberties Union, Amici Curiae, Thomas H. Barnard, Irwin M. Feldman, Lewis R. Katz, Bernard A. Berkman, Lewis A. Stern, Melvin L. Wulf, Alan H. Levine
67/09/27 Brief Of American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union Of Ohio, And New York Civil Liberties Union, Amici Curiae, Thomas H. Barnard, Irwin M. Feldman, Lewis R. Katz, Bernard A. Berkman, Lewis A. Stern, Melvin L. Wulf, Alan H. Levine
United States Supreme Court
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of New York and New York Civil Liberties Union's Amici Curiae Brief arguing against the "stop-and-frisk" practice as seen in Terry v. Ohio and Chilton v. Ohio, Peters v. New York, and Sibron v. New York.
67/08/31 Brief For The N.A.A.C.P Legal Defense And Educational Fund, Inc., As Amicus Curiae, Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit Iii, Michael Meltsner, Melvyn Zarr, Anthony G. Amsterdam, William E. Mcdaniels Jr.
67/08/31 Brief For The N.A.A.C.P Legal Defense And Educational Fund, Inc., As Amicus Curiae, Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit Iii, Michael Meltsner, Melvyn Zarr, Anthony G. Amsterdam, William E. Mcdaniels Jr.
United States Supreme Court
"The Court should hold that neither stops nor frisks may be made without probable cause. In each of these cases, the judgment of conviction should be reversed" -- conclusion, p. 69.
67/05/17 Brief In Opposition To Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Reuben M. Payne, John T. Corrigan
67/05/17 Brief In Opposition To Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Reuben M. Payne, John T. Corrigan
United States Supreme Court
No abstract provided.
67/03/17 Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of Ohio, Louis Stokes
67/03/17 Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of Ohio, Louis Stokes
United States Supreme Court
Argues that the introduction of evidence (their guns) against Terry and Chilton violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments and that "bare suspicion alone" does not meet the requirements for "probable cause" set forth in the Forth and Fourteenth Amendments.
67/01/11 Docket And Journal Entries, Court Of Appeals, Emil J. Masgay
67/01/11 Docket And Journal Entries, Court Of Appeals, Emil J. Masgay
Eighth Judicial District of Ohio, Court of Appeals, Cuyahoga County
Docket and journal entries for Ohio v. Terry and Ohio v. Chilton, prepared by Emil J. Masgay, Clerk of Courts at the Eighth Judicial District Court of Appeals.
67/01/09 Precipe, Louis Stokes
67/01/09 Precipe, Louis Stokes
United States Supreme Court
Precipe asking the Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga County to prepare and file with the United States Supreme Court a certified transcript of the docket, and journal entries together with the original papers and including the Court's opinion in State of Ohio v. Richard D. Chilton.