United States v. Arvizu (original) (raw)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reaffirmed the proposition that the Fourth Amendment required courts to analyze the reasonableness of a traffic stop based on the totality of the circumstances instead of examining the plausibility of each reason an officer gives for stopping a motorist individually. (en)
- https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/534/266.html
- https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/534/266/
- https://www.oyez.org/cases/2001/00-1519
- https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/232/1241/514862/
- https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-1519.ZO.html
- http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep534/usrep534266/usrep534266.pdf
- 6122047 (xsd:integer)
- 6694 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
- 987281911 (xsd:integer)
- dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases
- dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_534
- dbr:United_States_Border_Patrol
- dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Arizona
- dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases
- dbr:Trial_de_novo
- dbr:Tucson
- dbr:Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
- dbr:Reasonable_suspicion
- dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Rehnquist_Court
- dbc:United_States_Fourth_Amendment_case_law
- dbc:2002_in_United_States_case_law
- dbr:L._Ed._2d
- dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
- dbr:Douglas,_Arizona
- dbr:Ornelas_v._United_States
- dbr:Certiorari
- dbr:Totality_of_the_circumstances
- dbr:Marijuana
- dbr:F.3d
- dbr:Ninth_Circuit_Court_of_Appeals
- dbr:U.S._Highway_191
- 0001-11-27 (xsd:gMonthDay)
- 2001 (xsd:integer)
- United States v. Arvizu, (en)
- Scalia (en)
- 0001-01-15 (xsd:gMonthDay)
- 2002 (xsd:integer)
- United States of America v. Ralph Arvizu (en)
- Under the totality of the circumstances, reasonable suspicion supported a border patrol agent's decision to stop a motorist traveling on an isolated road in a forested area of southern Arizona near the Mexican border, even if each of the reasons the officer gave for the stop, viewed in isolation, had an innocent explanation. (en)
- unanimous (en)
- United States v. Arvizu (en)
- Rehnquist (en)
- 172800.0
- 25920.0
- 266 (xsd:integer)
- 534 (xsd:integer)
- dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases
- dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Rehnquist_Court
- dbc:United_States_Fourth_Amendment_case_law
- dbc:2002_in_United_States_case_law
- owl:Thing
- dbo:Case
- dbo:LegalCase
- dbo:UnitOfWork
- wikidata:Q2334719
- yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases
- yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCasesOfTheRehnquistCourt
- yago:Abstraction100002137
- yago:Case107308889
- yago:Event100029378
- yago:Happening107283608
- yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100
- yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity
- dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reaffirmed the proposition that the Fourth Amendment required courts to analyze the reasonableness of a traffic stop based on the totality of the circumstances instead of examining the plausibility of each reason an officer gives for stopping a motorist individually. (en)
- United States v. Arvizu (en)
- freebase:United States v. Arvizu
- wikidata:United States v. Arvizu
- https://global.dbpedia.org/id/4wEce
- yago-res:United States v. Arvizu
- (en)
- United States of America v. Ralph Arvizu (en)
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of