ipl-logo

Riley Vs Robinson Case Study

1619 Words7 Pages

Next, almost five years later another outstanding case that was brought to court was United States v. Robinson. In this case, an officer arrested Robinson due to operating a vehicle with a license that was revoked. Once Robinson was in the officer’s custody, the officer performed a pat-down, and could not determine what was in Robinson’s jacket pocket. Therefore, the item was seized and the officer was able to identify the object as a package of cigarettes. However, from there the officer continued to search through the package of cigarettes and found that there were fourteen capsules of heroin inside (Riley, n.d.).
When the case was brought to the United States Court of Appeals, the determination was that the officer performed a search that …show more content…

Gant is the third and final tremendously important case that had historical development into the case law applicable to Riley v. California. In the case of Arizona v. Gant, a vehicle search was the immediate concern, and whether or not the passenger compartment could lawfully be searched without a warrant. In this case, the court noted that this was different than the Chimel case because in that case, it dealt with an arrested person and an unsecured area that was within their reach, that area could be searched to protect the officer. Therefore, this case is different, due to the fact that the passenger compartment was secured. However, the court determined that this is an exception, and it was allowable to search the passenger compartment without a warrant only when there is a reasonable thought there is going to be evidence in the compartment that is pertinent to the arrest. The court was forthcoming when they noted that the decision, in this case, was not decided based off of the Chimel case, this case was thought to have extremely different factors from the Chimel case, and needed to be addressed separately (Riley, …show more content…

A persons’ privacy goes well beyond just what is commonly expected based on human nature. Privacy needs to be taken seriously due to the dangerous effects that can come about if there is an intrusion. So, for the courts to not address the blatantly obvious concerns of privacy due to cellular phones would be highly misjudged. Further, even though there is a better chance now with legislation to make strides in the realm of cellular data protection in relation to the Fourth Amendment, if it is not worked on and if we do not progress, generations to come will do nothing but further suffer (David Leon Riley, v. CALIFORNIA, UNITED STATES, v. BRIMA WURIE, 2014; Dee,

Show More
Related
519 Words | 3 Pages

With surveillance, they observe that he meet with a person, and proceed to return to Illinois, via driving. Based on the anonymous tip and the observation of said events, matching in similarity to the information provided in the letter, the law enforcement obtained a search warrant. Duing the exection of the search warrant, a massive durg load was discovered in Gates car, he was subsequently arrested. The decision of the Trial Courts, made judgement that there was no probable cause, thus invalidating the search warrant, leaving the drugs found, inadmissible to the case.

Read More
2071 Words | 9 Pages

The Court of Appeals stated that the search should have ended because “a typically reasonable person would not have understood defendant’s consent to ‘real quick’ search.” Based on the analysis in Cantor, the search in Henderson’s car lasted longer than what would be considered “quickly.” The ecstasy found in the car should have been suppressed as evidence against Henderson because it did not meet the test of objective reasonableness. Officer Raney never specified that he was searching for drugs in the car.

Read More
738 Words | 3 Pages

Ct. App. 1991) (holding that the evidence was insufficient to prove knowledge of a rock of cocaine hidden between driver's seat and transmission tunnel because the defendant was not sole occupant of the vehicle, even though he was in the driver's seat, admitted he was in the high crime area to buy marijuana, and admitted he knew that the passenger possessed marijuana on his person); People v. Roundtree, 482 N.E.2d 693, 698 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985) (holding that the state failed to produce sufficient evidence to prove knowledge of the contents of a suitcase containing cocaine, located on the rear seat of vehicle in which the defendant was one of three passengers in the vehicle); Johnson v. State, 625 S.W.2d 330, 330-331 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981)

Read More
1102 Words | 5 Pages

After being charged with unlawful possession of heroin in 1967, the trial court denied Sibron’s motion to suppress the evidence, saying that it was an unlawful stop and frisk and a violation of his fourth amendment rights ("Sibron v. New York - ACLU Pros & Cons - ProCon.org," 2009). Sibron plead guilty and served time before his case went to the intermediate state

Read More
576 Words | 3 Pages

In the article produced by Damon Root, the Indiana Supreme Court stated this, “ Cellphones are double- edged swords, increasing convenience at the expense of privacy.” Although an electronic device may help a consumer in an everyday life,privacy is cut short considering that most of the storage in a device is not protected. As consumers put their information out on the internet, it is for everyone to see. One statement from the Supreme court said this, “What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection.” As a person releases information to the public, exposing themself to whoever is allowed to see, they are opening a window to their personal

Read More
1033 Words | 5 Pages

During a 2007 traffic stop, police found 1.3 grams of marijuana in his car. This is equivalent to about two or three marijuana cigarettes. Moncrieffe pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, a violation of Ga. Code Ann. § 16- 13- 30 (j) (1) (2007).

Read More
1800 Words | 8 Pages

In United States v. Miller the Supreme court ruled that using the bank records of a man to convict him did not violate the Fourth Amendment, even though law-enforcement officials did not have the warrant to look thru the bank records. This was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment because the bank records contained only “the information voluntarily conveys to the banks and exposed to their employees in the ordinary course of business.” By getting any working cellphone, it is known that the information that goes in and out of the towers such as the times the calls were made, data usage, and the general vicinity of the person does not violate privacy, and it’s rather a known agreement with the person using the cellphone and the cell phone

Read More
429 Words | 2 Pages

Arizona v. Gant is a case that affected law enforcement's conduct during the course of a traffic stop as well as searching the vehicle and its occupants. Furthermore, the case stemmed from a complaint of narcotics activity at a resident in 1999 and Rodney Gant informed uniformed officers the owner of the resident would return to the resident later that same day (Staff, 2008). The officers conducted an investigation and discovered Gant had an active arrest warrant for driving on a suspended license. Later the same day, uniformed officers revisited the resident and observed Gant in full control of a motor vehicle as Gant parked the vehicle in a driveway and exited the vehicle. Consequently, officers arrested Gant on the warrant and secured him in the back of their police car, as other people were arrested and detained in other police cars in relevance to the initial call that gave law enforcement a right to be present.

Read More
619 Words | 3 Pages

In August 2009, David Riley was pulled over for having expired tags on his car and driving with an expired driver’s license. In accordance to the San Diego Police Department Policy, the officer was obligated to impound Riley’s car and conduct a warrantless search of the vehicle. The officer confiscated two handguns which had later been linked to a gang related shooting that had taken place a few weeks prior and Riley’s cell phone. Police officers then rummaged through the data contained on the cell phone which linked Riley to gang affiliated activities and was later used as admissible evidence in court. Riley was convicted on three charges for his involvement in the gang related shooting and the California Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction, however he argued that the officers were prohibited to search his cell phone without a warrant and that it was an intrusion of his privacy.

Read More
585 Words | 3 Pages

Earls was 5 to 4 in favor of the defendants saying that a valid reason is needed in order to conduct a drug test. Lindsay Earls, the plaintiff, argued, “The policy violates the Fourth Amendment as incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment” (Board of Education v. Lindsay Earls 4). She claimed that her rights to a reasonable search and seizure were violated. The Board of Education, the defendant, said that the policy was not violating the students’ rights because the government didn’t require it. The policy was simply in place “to send a message to parents and students that they don’t condone drug use” (Boyd).

Read More
487 Words | 2 Pages

The Arizona v. Gant case is very interesting. Gant also had a gun in the car. I’m assuming Gant didn’t consent to the search, even though I don’t see any of that mentioned in the case. Normally, police officers ask if they can search your car. I’m a bit confused though.

Read More
814 Words | 4 Pages

I fear due to the recent rulings on the Patriot Act and NSA may allow people who utilize Apple’s newest feature may find that they may face a subpoena to open their phones and consequently have them used against them. As seen in the Salinas case refusal to do so may preemptively determine the defendant guilty for choosing to protect their privacy. As companies like Apple and Google push to make our communications more secure to cater toward their clientele. It will be interesting to see how the fifth amendment will apply in a digital age and to see what measures will be taken to protect or limit our

Read More
1335 Words | 6 Pages

The opinion goes on to read: “Admittedly, some of our prior cases have taken long steps down that road, giving great deference to

Read More
427 Words | 2 Pages

Cell phone can unveil information within our call history, text messages, pictures, and even internet searches. Access to our cell phones is like access to our lives. No matter how much time passes, the fourth amendment continues to

Read More
2994 Words | 12 Pages

The question raised here was, did more than 0.2% of morphine constituted an essential element of the offence or did less than 0.2% resulted to an exception. The defendant argued that there was no case because the prosecution failed to prove that the mixture contain excessive amount of morphine. The trial judge rejected the argument and held that the defendant shoulders the burden of proof. On appeal, the Court of Appeal affirms the decision of the trial judge. When the case reached the House of Lords, it was argued that Edwards was decided wrongly.

Read More

More about Riley Vs Robinson Case Study

Related Topics

Open Document