What happened in Brendlin v California?

What happened in Brendlin v California?

Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that all occupants of a car are “seized” for purposes of the Fourth Amendment during a traffic stop, not just the driver.

What did Pennsylvania v Mimms decide?

Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court criminal law decision holding that a police officer ordering a person out of a car following a traffic stop and conducting a pat-down to check for weapons did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

What are some court cases involving the Fourth Amendment?

Supreme Court Cases

• Katz v. United States, 1967.
• Terry v. Ohio, 1967.
• Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 1989.
• City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 2000.

Who won Griffin v California?

Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, by a 6–2 vote, that it is a violation of a defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights for the prosecutor to comment to the jury on the defendant’s declining to testify, or for the judge to instruct the jury that such …

Does Pennsylvania vs Mimms apply to passengers?

24, 664 A. 2d 1 (1995), ruling that Pennsylvania v. Mimms does not apply to passengers.

Who won Arizona vs Johnson?

A jury convicted Johnson of the gun-possession charge. See 217 Ariz., at 60–61, 170 P. 3d, at 669–670. A divided panel of the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed Johnson’s conviction.

What is Griffin error?

Griffin error derives its name from the case,Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (U.S. 1965) where it was held that a prosecutor is not permitted, either expressly or by direct implication, to comment in the presence of the jury on a defendant’s exercise of the right against self-incrimination.

What is Maryland v Wilson?

The Court held that after lawfully stopping a speeding vehicle, an officer may order its passengers to step out. While burdening their personal liberty somewhat, officers must be permitted such authority over passengers if the overriding government’s interest in officer safety is to be protected.

Can the police officer seize anything that is not included in the warrant?

It is well established by court decision that police in executing a search warrant may seize items not listed in the warrant if they observe such items in plain sight – and if it is immediately apparent to them that such items are evidence of crime.