128 Cited authorities

Yarborough v. Alvarado
541 U.S. 652 (2004) Cited 7,996 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that habeas relief from a state court judgment is appropriate only when "the necessity to apply [an] earlier rule [set forth by the Supreme Court is] beyond doubt"
Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (1966) Cited 60,311 times 64 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment
Arizona v. Gant
556 U.S. 332 (2009) Cited 3,897 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 38,175 times 73 Legal Analyses
Holding that a police officer who has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity may conduct a brief investigative stop
Brigham City v. Stuart
547 U.S. 398 (2006) Cited 2,575 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that "law enforcement officers may enter a home without a warrant . . . to protect an occupant from imminent injury"
United States v. Jones
565 U.S. 400 (2012) Cited 1,862 times 109 Legal Analyses
Holding that installation of a tracking device was "a physical intrusion would have been considered a ‘search’ within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when it was adopted"
Payton v. New York
445 U.S. 573 (1980) Cited 7,629 times 33 Legal Analyses
Holding that a New York statute "authoriz[ing] police officers to enter a private residence without a warrant and with force, if necessary, to make a routine felony arrest" was "not consistent with the Fourth Amendment"
Edwards v. Arizona
451 U.S. 477 (1981) Cited 6,430 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that continued questioning violates Fifth Amendment if suspect clearly asserts right to counsel
Wong Sun v. United States
371 U.S. 471 (1963) Cited 12,246 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding evidence stemming from Fourth Amendment violations must be excluded from trial as fruit of the poisonous tree
Dunaway v. New York
442 U.S. 200 (1979) Cited 3,725 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that seizing and transporting a suspect to a police station for interrogation without probable cause violated the Fourth Amendment

The People, Respondent,v.Scott F. Doll, Appellant.

128 Cited authorities

Holding that habeas relief from a state court judgment is appropriate only when "the necessity to apply [an] earlier rule [set forth by the Supreme Court is] beyond doubt"

Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment

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 "law enforcement officers may enter a home without a warrant . . . to protect an occupant from imminent injury"

Holding that installation of a tracking device was "a physical intrusion would have been considered a ‘search’ within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when it was adopted"

Holding that a New York statute "authoriz[ing] police officers to enter a private residence without a warrant and with force, if necessary, to make a routine felony arrest" was "not consistent with the Fourth Amendment"

Holding that continued questioning violates Fifth Amendment if suspect clearly asserts right to counsel

Holding evidence stemming from Fourth Amendment violations must be excluded from trial as fruit of the poisonous tree

Holding that seizing and transporting a suspect to a police station for interrogation without probable cause violated the Fourth Amendment