State V. Perkins
"Fighting Words" not protected. Officers need to have a thicker skin!
Houston V. Hill
Cannot interfere with Police Officer's duties.
Previous
Play
Next
Rewind 10 seconds
Move forward 10 seconds
Unmute
--
/
--
Full screen
Brainpower
Read More
State V. B...
SCCJA Unit 2 Court Cases
with complete solutions
State V. Perkins - answer "Fighting Words" not protected. Officers
need to have a thicker skin!
Houston V. Hill - answer Cannot interfere with Police Officer's duties.
State V. Bailey - answer People can curse at Police but cannot be
loud and boisterous in a public place.
City of Bismark V. Nassif - answer A Threat is something that can be
reasonably acted upon. Defendant was arrested for DC.
State V. Messervy - answer Security Officers can prosecute
misdemeanor cases in summary court that occurred within the
boundaries they patrol.
State V. Sossamon - answer Officer's must prosecute their own
cases. They cannot pass off the cases to officer's that are better at
present a case.
City of Easley V. Cartee - answer License security officers have been
granted by legislation the authority and power of sheriffs to arrest
any person violating the criminal statutes of the state.
Katz V. US - answer Get a warrant if you want to search legally. Also
defendant has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
, Riley V. California; US V. Wurie - answer Need search warrant to
search cell phones.
State V. Peters - answer Exceptions to the warrant requirement,
Search incident to arrest, Hot Pursuit, Stop & Frisk, Automobile
Exception, Plain View Doctrine and Consent.
US V. Fisher - answer If officer lies on Affidavit and the case is based
on that false PC. The defendants Due Process was violated.
State V. McKnight - answer Sworn Oral testimony is not enough,
Must have a written Affidavit.
Johnson V. US - answer Determination of PC must be made by a
Neutral, Detached Magistrate.
Maryland V. Garrison - answer If a search warrant is obtained and
describes a specific area and upon arrival that area is unknowingly
split up into two areas. The evidence found within the second area
does not require suppression.
Richards V. Wisconsin - answer When officers originally requested a
"No knock" warrant, but the Judge issues a "Knock and Announce"
warrant. The officers on scene can still make a judgement call and
still use a "No Knock" approach.
US V. Ramirez - answer With Search warrant in hand, the officers
can use Trickery or Deception to gain entrance into the residence.
"Pizza delivery"!
State V. Valentine - answer The suspect right to privacy is minimal
when police have the warrant and they have no right to refuse entry
to police, only a right to submit voluntarily.
Les avantages d'acheter des résumés chez Stuvia:
Qualité garantie par les avis des clients
Les clients de Stuvia ont évalués plus de 700 000 résumés. C'est comme ça que vous savez que vous achetez les meilleurs documents.
L’achat facile et rapide
Vous pouvez payer rapidement avec iDeal, carte de crédit ou Stuvia-crédit pour les résumés. Il n'y a pas d'adhésion nécessaire.
Focus sur l’essentiel
Vos camarades écrivent eux-mêmes les notes d’étude, c’est pourquoi les documents sont toujours fiables et à jour. Cela garantit que vous arrivez rapidement au coeur du matériel.
Foire aux questions
Qu'est-ce que j'obtiens en achetant ce document ?
Vous obtenez un PDF, disponible immédiatement après votre achat. Le document acheté est accessible à tout moment, n'importe où et indéfiniment via votre profil.
Garantie de remboursement : comment ça marche ?
Notre garantie de satisfaction garantit que vous trouverez toujours un document d'étude qui vous convient. Vous remplissez un formulaire et notre équipe du service client s'occupe du reste.
Auprès de qui est-ce que j'achète ce résumé ?
Stuvia est une place de marché. Alors, vous n'achetez donc pas ce document chez nous, mais auprès du vendeur BRAINBOOSTERS. Stuvia facilite les paiements au vendeur.
Est-ce que j'aurai un abonnement?
Non, vous n'achetez ce résumé que pour €12,43. Vous n'êtes lié à rien après votre achat.
