Court Cases - 1. Chimmel vs. California A. September 3,...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Chimmel vs. California 1. September 3, 1965 A. Arrested for burglary of a coin shop B. Petitioner did not give permission for the search C. Three police ofFcers in the home in Santa Anna, California D. Search took about 45 minutes E. ±ound coins, medals, tokens, and other items ±. Unconstitutionally seized evidence was the plea of the Petitioner G. The warrant was invalid but it stood because of Police Good ±aith H. Rules on Search Incident to Arrest I. OfFcers thought that on the basis of a lawful arrest, they were allowed to J. search anyways Police asked wife to enter the home and she allowed it K. The petitioner had asked about the security of the coin shop, denied an L. invitation to a bike race and he declined Evidence comes from M. Petitioner told his neighbor about the break in a. Petitioner told the store owner that he was going to rob his place b. Asked about his most valuable articles 1. Asked about the alarm system 2. Showed the neighbor typewriters and said that they were "hotter than a c. three dollar bill" California court said that the search is good N. Not Ex Post ±acto because it does not disadvantage the citizens O. Search incident to arrest has been on the books since 1914 P. In Ribbinowitz in 1950 the court stated that the limits included the place of Q. the arrest The court has changed the limits seven times R. Dickerson vs. Minnesota 2. Contraband detected A. November 9, 1989 B. 8:15 PM a. Minneapolis, Minnesota C. Man leaving an apartment building that had been a notorious crack house D. Man turned around and walked away when he saw the squad car E. During pat down he felt a lump of contraband ±. Retrieved it from the pocket and found it to be crack cocaine G. Court says that the Terry Search was legal H. Court found that the seizure was illegal I.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Illinois vs. Caballes 3. Illinois trooper stopped a man for speeding A. Daniel Gillette a. Second trooper went to the scene with a narcotics dog B. Craig Graham
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/26/2012 for the course GENERAL 101 taught by Professor None during the Spring '12 term at Aurora University.

Page1 / 5

Court Cases - 1. Chimmel vs. California A. September 3,...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online