| Author | Post |
|---|
Decoligny
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Feb 7th, 2010 08:47 pm |
|
like a cork in water
pops to the top
|
A ECNALG
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Feb 8th, 2010 12:18 am |
|
Please excuse any duplicity.
People should be familiar enough with this material so that in the event of a contact with law enforcement that goes beyond PC 12031e, one may knowledgeably discuss the matter with the officer or deputy in a civil fashion.
DEFINITIONS:
“Plain View” Doctrine
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Plain+View+Doctrine
http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/2043-plain-view-doctrine-
Reasonable Suspicion / Cause
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+cause
Probable Cause
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/probable+cause
Stop and Frisk
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Stop+and+Frisk
Memo to: Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Subject: Probable Cause, Reasonable Suspicion, and Reasonableness Standards in the Context of the Fourth Amendment and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m013006.pdf
COURT CASES:
Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321 (1987)
“Search” for serial numbers; “Plain View” doctrine; 4th Amendment
http://supreme.justia.com/us/480/321/case.html
Florida v. J. L., 529 U.S. 266 (1999)
Anonymous Tips; Reasonable suspicion; Stop and Frisk (Terry Search); 4th Amendment
http://supreme.justia.com/us/529/266/case.html
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial DIistrict Court of Nevada, Humbolt County, et al., 542 U.S. 177 (2004)
Reasonable Suspicion; Stop and Identify statutes; Terry search; 4th Amendment
http://supreme.justia.com/us/542/177/case.html
Ornelas et al. v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996)
Reasonable Suspicion; Probable cause; 4th Amendment
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/517/690.html
Reynolds v. State of Florida, 592 So. 2d 1082 (1992)
Reasonable Suspicion; Terry search; Consent to search; Illegal use of Handcuffs
http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/75832/75832.html
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
Reasonable Suspicion, Investigatory “Stop” and “Frisk”; 4th Amendment
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/392/1.html
St. John v. David McColley and The Six Unknown Officers of the Alamagordo Department of Public Safety, U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, No. 08-994 BB/LAM (2009)
Open Carry in Public; Search and Seizure; 4th Amendment
http://www.nmcourt.fed.us/Drs-Web/view-file?full-path-file-name=%2Fdata%2Fdrs%2Fdm%2Fdocuments%2Fcadd%2F2009%2F09%2F08%2F0002561429-0000000000-08cv00994.pdf
United States of America, v. Kahli Ubiles, US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 224 F.3d 213 (2000)
Anonymous Tips; Reasonable Suspicion; Terry Search; 4th Amendment
http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F3/224/213/576335/
US v. King and Burdex, US Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, 990 F.2d 1552 (1993)
Firearm in Vehicle; Reasonable Suspicion; Seizure; 4th Amendment
http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/990/1552/434777/
U.S. CODE:
United States Code Title 42, Chapter 21, Subchapter 1, Section 1983
Civil action for deprivation of rights
http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title42/42usc1983.html
ARTICLES:
Does the use of handcuffs turn a temporary detention situation into an arrest?
http://www.icje.org/id72.htm
Reasonableness of Handcuffing during a valid “Terry Stop”
http://www.patc.com/weeklyarticles/tshcuffs.shtml
Legal Update: Terry Stop Document from A to Z
http://www.halloran-sage.com/News/story.aspx?storyid=2309
Liability and the Use of Handcuffs
http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/35314-liability-and-the-use-of-handcuffs
Reasons to handcuff without making an arrest with court cases cited
http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/35306-reasons-to-handcuff-without-making-an-arrest-with-court-cases-cited
Searching Suspects - An integral law enforcement function
Terry Pat-Down versus Consent Search
[url=http://www.officer.com/web/online/Operations-and-Tactics/Searching-Suspects/3$31099]http://www.officer.com/web/online/Operations-and-Tactics/Searching-Suspects/3$31099[/url]
COURT CASE RESEARCH WEBSITE:
http://law.justia.com/
|
MudCamper
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Feb 9th, 2010 05:05 pm |
|
Thanks, A ECNALG, I'll incorporate any of this that I missed into the first 2 posts.
|
Decoligny
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Feb 10th, 2010 08:08 pm |
|
| BTT
|
Decoligny
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Feb 14th, 2010 04:09 pm |
|
| BTT
|
Decoligny
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Feb 19th, 2010 04:20 pm |
|
| Bump to the Top
|
MudCamper
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Mar 1st, 2010 04:48 pm |
|
| BTT
|
MudCamper
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Mar 7th, 2010 02:06 am |
|
| BTT
|
Wc
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Feb 15th, 2010 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 7th, 2010 03:46 am |
|
A ECNALG wrote: COURT CASES:
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial DIistrict Court of Nevada, Humbolt County, et al., 542 U.S. 177 (2004)
Reasonable Suspicion; Stop and Identify statutes; Terry search; 4th Amendment
http://supreme.justia.com/us/542/177/case.html
Howdy A ECNALG, you and MudCamper did a wonderful job however, please remove the Hiibel v. Sixth because it isn't applicable to our State and it is sent misinformation to everyone, especially both lazy DAs & LEOs did missing the other cases facts.
I did the searched and wrote it back in 1985. Someone stolen it and place in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Identify_statutes under the Obligations under “stop and identify” laws in State of California and I don’t mind, just let’s everyone known about this situation.
And I’m about to send this same message to MudCamper but I just notice that thread has been changed on regarding of Hiibel v. Sixth (not applicable in CA). Thank you!
|
A ECNALG
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Mar 7th, 2010 05:29 am |
|
The reason for citing Hiibel here is that some LE departments and and D.A.s also cite Hiibel, but as justification for demanding that the "detainee" provide his/her name. Hiibel is specific to Nevada, a state with a "stop and identify" statute. SCOTUS said:
"Although it is well established that an officer may ask a suspect to identify himself in the course of a Terry stop, it has been an open question whether the suspect can be arrested and prosecuted for refusal to answer....
"The principles of Terry permit a State to require a suspect to disclose his name in the course of a Terry stop....
"Under these principles, an officer may not arrest a suspect for failure to identify himself if the request for identification is not reasonably related to the circumstances justifying the stop. The Court noted a similar limitation in Hayes, where it suggested that Terry may permit an officer to determine a suspect's identity by compelling the suspect to submit to fingerprinting only if there is "a reasonable basis for believing that fingerprinting will establish or negate the suspect's connection with that crime." 470 U. S., at 817."
The Terry stop must of course be valid, and for that it must be based upon reasonable suspicion of a crime.
California does not have a stop-and-identify statute.
Unloaded open carry is not a public offense, thus, no crime is committed by doing so.
The fact that the officer does not know whether the detained UOC'er is in the prohibitted class should be irrelevant barring articulable reasonable suspicion of a crime.
Thus, the citation of Hiibel is an important educational tool for those who practice, or intend to practice, UOC.
|
Wc
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Feb 15th, 2010 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 7th, 2010 09:21 am |
|
A ECNALG wrote: Thus, the citation of Hiibel is an important educational tool for those who practice, or intend to practice, UOC.
I'm aware of that and thanks for posted to narrow that down and I agreed as above but like I wrote before, lazy DAs and LEOs missed that parts isn't in their memos nor or explanation of why in Hiibel v. Sixth case? Are they bothered to read it all and so is the UOC? Mostly like to read in summary just like you did it as above posted. You already got Terry v. Ohio is good enough without the Hiibel. Please just add (not applicable in CA) to getting the DA and LEO attention and let's them figure it out why and what if they missed your posted from the thousands of threads here? Also add the link I posted as above before or used from the MudCamper's link: Kolender V. Lawson on disregarded of Hiibel v. Sixth case.
Just wanting to stop the gossip. Thanks again.
|
MudCamper
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Mar 9th, 2010 09:49 pm |
|
Thanks for the constructive input, Wc. And A ECNALG I still haven't gone through and made sure all of your references are in the first three post. But I will!
|
Legend_AB
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Mar 10th, 2010 06:42 am |
|
Bump.
What do we need to do to get a couple of stickies around here.  
|
Current time is 08:33 pm | Page:   1 2 |
|
