A judge has ruled that evidence involving drug charges against an Idaho woman can’t be used because a police traffic stop turned into a 28-minute interrogation that violated Idaho case law and the U.S. Constitution.
Congress hatched the idea of fusion centers in the aftermath of the Sept.11, 2011, terrorist attacks.
Police must obtain a search warrant in many cases to draw blood to get evidence of drunken driving, the U.S. Supreme Court said in a divided opinion in a case involving a Missouri man.
Police engaged in a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when they used a drug-sniffing dog on a homeowner’s porch to investigate the contents of the home, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 5-4.
Exactly two weeks after Gov. Scott Walker proposed expanding DNA collection efforts in Wisconsin for those arrested on felony charges, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in a related case Justice Samuel Alito Jr. called “perhaps, the most important criminal procedure case that this court has heard in decades.”
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has rejected the appeal of a man who argued police violated his constitutional rights by seizing his vehicle and planting a GPS device.
The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court appeared unwilling Wednesday to allow police to take blood samples from suspected drunk drivers without a warrant.
The New York Times recently reported that the Senate Judiciary Committee has approved a bill “that would strengthen privacy protection for e-mails by requiring law enforcement officials to obtain a warrant from a judge in most cases before gaining access to messages in individual accounts stored electronically.”
Oral arguments in two Fourth Amendment cases before the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday focused on a common question: just what does a dog’s nose know?
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether a police officer who drew a DUI suspect’s blood after he refused to consent violated the Fourth Amendment.
While the Taser is probably the most common culprit when it comes to excessive force lawsuits involving less-than-lethal devices, last week the 9th Circuit gave the go ahead to a college student’s §1983 claim against police officers who shot pepperballs to disperse a crowd attending a campus party.
Months after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the police’s use of GPS tracking devices on suspects’ cars constitutes a search for Fourth Amendment purposes, law enforcement officials, defense lawyers and lawmakers are trying to define the limits of the ruling.
Authorities have a right to search a felon’s property for guns, even though they have no cause or suspicion to do so, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled.
A convicted felon may get a new trial because his lawyers misread the Fourth Amendment implications of their client’s contention that a gun found on his person was planted by police.
The last oral argument of the U.S. Supreme Court’s term was an explosive one, as the justices considered whether SB 1070, the controversial Arizona immigration statute, is preempted by federal law.
Jailhouse strip searches of inmates arrested for non-indictable offenses are constitutional as long as the policy for conducting such searches strikes a reasonable balance between inmate privacy and the needs of the institutions, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled.
Recently, in United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court ruled that the attaching of a GPS tracking device to a suspect’s car without his knowledge and monitoring of the vehicle’s movements violated the suspect’s Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure.
Police officers were immune from being sued for violating the Fourth Amendment by executing a purportedly overbroad “all firearms” search warrant, the U.S Supreme Court has ruled.
A federal case in St. Louis will be one of the first in the nation to test the application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision declaring the use of GPS tracking a search under the Fourth Amendment.
A federal court has ordered the city of Madison to pay members of a gun-rights group $10,000 to settle a lawsuit.
In a case that had the justices questioning just how far the expectation of privacy extends in a world of ever-evolving technologies, the U.S. Supreme Court considered Tuesday whether the police’s use of a warrantless GPS tracking device on a suspect’s car violated the Fourth Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court is trying to determine if the strip search of a county jail inmate, erroneously arrested on a warrant for a minor offense, violated the Fourth Amendment.
During oral arguments that focused on the difficult task of line drawing, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court tried to determine if the strip search of a county jail inmate, erroneously arrested on a warrant for a minor offense, violated the Fourth Amendment.
After taking Columbus Day off, the U.S. Supreme Court is back in action to hear oral arguments this week on issues including whether claims arising under the Credit Repair Organizations Act are arbitrable, and whether the Fourth Amendment limits strip searches on jail inmates held on minor charges.
This U.S. Supreme Court term has all the makings of a blockbuster, with issues such as the constitutionality of the federal health care reform law, the ability of states to pass tough immigration enforcement laws and same-sex marriage rights all set to fall squarely at the Court’s doorstep.
The maximum penalty for armed robbery is not just a prison term, but a fine of $100,000.
By Kimberly Atkins Lawyers USA The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court tussled Monday with the limits of the exclusionary rule when the police conduct a search in a way that is lawful at the time, but later deemed unconstitutional by the Court. Willie Gene Davis, the petitioner in Davis v. U.S., was a passenger [...]
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals on Nov. 24 recognized that police could violate the Fourth Amendment by “constructive entry” of a home — being so intrusive that a reasonable person would not feel free to deny entry.
