• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/10

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

10 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Chimel v. California

Case law 1969; held that LE officers Arresting a subject at their house,


Cannot search entire home without a warrant, but could search immediate area where arrestee had access to

Arizona v Gant

Case law 2009; showed a need for officers to show a continuing threat by an arrested to their safety, or the need to preserve evidence for a warrantless search. Officer searched Gants car after he was arrested for driving on a suspended license, and vehicle searched incident to arrest. Overturned

California v Acevedo

One rule to govern all automobile searches, police may search an automobile or containers where they have PC to believe evidence can be found

New York v Belton

Case law 1981; when an officer has made a lawful arrest of a subject, the officer may contemporaneous incident to arrest, search the passenger compartment of that automobile

Graham v Connor

Courts established the “reasonable” standard for officers, as it relates to use ofnforce

Tennessee v Garner

Courts established that when officers are pursuing a fleeing felon, they may not use deadly force, unless they believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or GBI to them or others

Terry v Ohio

Stop and frisk. If officers have “reasonable suspicion” to believe a suspect has committed or committing a crime, they may stop and frisk

Weeks vs US

Established the exclusionary rule, shows that when evidence seized by Federal Authorities, which violates the person’s 4th amendment rights, may not be used in their prosecution

Carroll v United States

Courts established the “automobile exception” to 4th Amendment protections against warrantless searches

Thornton v United States

Search of a vehicle incident to arrest, may be allowed if officers reasonably believe there is evidence related to the crime, lofted in the vehicle