Search and Seizure: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
A visitor to a detention facility consents to a lesser expectation of privacy. ([https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=821110223886794804&q=199+Cal.App.4th+761&hl=en&as_sdt=2006''People v. Boutler'' (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 761, 769-772.]) | A visitor to a detention facility consents to a lesser expectation of privacy. ([https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=821110223886794804&q=199+Cal.App.4th+761&hl=en&as_sdt=2006''People v. Boutler'' (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 761, 769-772.]) | ||
==Ruse== | |||
''People v. Colt'' (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 1404 | |||
Revision as of 23:53, 16 February 2025
A custodial arrest for a fine-only offense does not violate the Fourth Amendment. (People v. McKay (2002) 27 Cal.4th 601, 606.)
Violation of state statutes for arrest does not violate the Fourth Amendment. (People v. McKay (2002) 27 Cal.4th 601, 606.)
Detention
A detention may occur for a future crime that is about to occur. (People v. Ellis (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1198; People v. Aldridge (1984) 35 Cal.3d 473, 478.)
Fact analysis vs consensual encounter. (People v. Paul (Feb. 14, 2022, B320488))
Officer Safety
Pennslyvania v. Mimms 434 US 106
Wilson 519 US 408
Detention facilities
A visitor to a detention facility consents to a lesser expectation of privacy. (People v. Boutler (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 761, 769-772.)
Ruse
People v. Colt (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 1404