47 Cited authorities

Whren v. United States
517 U.S. 806 (1996) Cited 8,590 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that, upon observing traffic violation, officer may stop vehicle regardless of his subjective motivations, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify that action"
Terry v. Ohio
392 U.S. 1 (1968) Cited 38,128 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 2,893 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that probable cause need not be for an "offense actually invoked at the time of arrest"
Horton v. California
496 U.S. 128 (1990) Cited 3,169 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding in the Fourth Amendment context that “evenhanded law enforcement is best achieved by the application of objective standards of conduct, rather than standards that depend upon the subjective state of mind of the officer”
Chimel v. California
395 U.S. 752 (1969) Cited 5,658 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
Brown v. Illinois
422 U.S. 590 (1975) Cited 3,981 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'"
Pennsylvania v. Mimms
434 U.S. 106 (1977) Cited 3,363 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that officer's practice of ordering occupants out of the car during all traffic stops was not a constitutional violation
United States v. Robinson
414 U.S. 218 (1973) Cited 3,356 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 2,283 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 3,591 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that appeal from conviction after service of sentence not moot if there may be collateral consequences

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

47 Cited authorities

Holding that, upon observing traffic violation, officer may stop vehicle regardless of his subjective motivations, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify that action"

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 in the Fourth Amendment context that “evenhanded law enforcement is best achieved by the application of objective standards of conduct, rather than standards that depend upon the subjective state of mind of the officer”

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 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 officer's practice of ordering occupants out of the car during all traffic stops was not a constitutional violation

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