48 Cited authorities

Arizona v. Gant
556 U.S. 332 (2009) Cited 3,891 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Fourth Amendment does not permit officers to search every vehicle incident to arrest
Terry v. Ohio
392 U.S. 1 (1968) Cited 38,165 times 73 Legal Analyses
Holding that a police officer who has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity may conduct a brief investigative stop
Devenpeck v. Alford
543 U.S. 146 (2004) Cited 2,897 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that probable cause need not be for an "offense actually invoked at the time of arrest"
Katz v. United States
389 U.S. 347 (1967) Cited 12,463 times 74 Legal Analyses
Holding that failure to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in a telephone booth would "ignore the vital role that the public telephone has come to play in private communication"
Chimel v. California
395 U.S. 752 (1969) Cited 5,661 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that, absent a search warrant, there is "no . . . justification" for searching an area not within a suspect's immediate control during an arrest
New York v. Belton
453 U.S. 454 (1981) Cited 3,125 times 33 Legal Analyses
Holding that when an officer has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the interior of that automobile
Brown v. Illinois
422 U.S. 590 (1975) Cited 3,983 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding statement was fruit of Fourth Amendment violation where police "illegality . . . had a quality of purposefulness" as "[t]he impropriety of the arrest was obvious" and detectives acknowledged "that the purpose of their action was 'for investigation' or for 'questioning'"
United States v. Robinson
414 U.S. 218 (1973) Cited 3,360 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that law enforcement officers are authorized to conduct a full search of every lawful custodial arrestee
Rawlings v. Kentucky
448 U.S. 98 (1980) Cited 2,284 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a defendant could not benefit from the unconstitutional search of another person's purse
Sibron v. New York
392 U.S. 40 (1968) Cited 3,595 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that appeal from conviction after service of sentence not moot if there may be collateral consequences
Section 470.05 - Determination of appeals; general criteria
N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 470.05 Cited 14,279 times
Providing that a question of law is presented when "a protest thereto was registered, by the party claiming error, at the time of such ruling . . . or at any subsequent time when the court had an opportunity of effectively changing the same."

The People, Respondent,v.Graham Reid, Appellant.

48 Cited authorities

Holding that the Fourth Amendment does not permit officers to search every vehicle incident to arrest

Holding that a police officer who has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity may conduct a brief investigative stop

Holding that probable cause need not be for an "offense actually invoked at the time of arrest"

Holding that failure to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in a telephone booth would "ignore the vital role that the public telephone has come to play in private communication"

Holding that, absent a search warrant, there is "no . . . justification" for searching an area not within a suspect's immediate control during an arrest

Holding that when an officer has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest, search the interior of that automobile

Holding statement was fruit of Fourth Amendment violation where police "illegality . . . had a quality of purposefulness" as "[t]he impropriety of the arrest was obvious" and detectives acknowledged "that the purpose of their action was 'for investigation' or for 'questioning'"

Holding that law enforcement officers are authorized to conduct a full search of every lawful custodial arrestee

Holding that a defendant could not benefit from the unconstitutional search of another person's purse

Holding that appeal from conviction after service of sentence not moot if there may be collateral consequences

Providing that a question of law is presented when "a protest thereto was registered, by the party claiming error, at the time of such ruling . . . or at any subsequent time when the court had an opportunity of effectively changing the same."