Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Automobile (1)
- Consensual Search (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
-
- Exclusionary Rule (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Frisk (1)
- Lawful custodial arrest (1)
- Open View (1)
- Plain View (1)
- Probable Cause (1)
- Reasonable Suspicion (1)
- Search (1)
- Searches in Schools (1)
- Seizure (1)
- Terry Stop (1)
- Terry Stops (1)
- Vehicle Searches (1)
- Warrant (1)
- Warrant Exceptions (1)
- Warrantless search (1)
- Washington State Constitutional Law (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law Enforcement and Corrections
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Seattle University Law Review
This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …
New York V. Belton: The Scope Of Warrantless Searches Extended, Glenn D. Forcucci
New York V. Belton: The Scope Of Warrantless Searches Extended, Glenn D. Forcucci
Pepperdine Law Review
The United States Supreme Court, in New York v. Belton, expanded the area in which a policeman may search after he has made a lawful custodial arrest. In so ruling, the Supreme Court dramatically departed from its previous holding in Chimel v. California. While Chimel limited the area of the search to the area "within the immediate control of the arrestee," Belton allowed a search outside of that established boundary, as the Supreme Court allowed the search to include the passenger compartment of an automobile which the arrestee had not occupied.
Comments: Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging And The Law Today: The Brain Is Reliable As A Mitigating Factor, But Unreliable As An Aggravating Factor Or As A Method Of Lie Detection, Kristina E. Donahue
Comments: Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging And The Law Today: The Brain Is Reliable As A Mitigating Factor, But Unreliable As An Aggravating Factor Or As A Method Of Lie Detection, Kristina E. Donahue
University of Baltimore Law Review
No abstract provided.