Michigan Department of State Police vs Sitz

Sobriety Checkpoints

Sobriety checkpoints are a form of stop and are constitutional if they are conducted fairly and do not pose a safety hazard 

Michigan vs Summers

Field Detection

Police officers may detain suspects with less than probable cause and may legally require suspects to reenter their houses and remain there until evidence establishing probable cause is found

Michigan vs Tyler

Administrative Warrants

Public safety personnel may enter structures that are on fire to extinguish the blaze, after which officicials may remain a reasonable length of time to investigate the cause of the blaze

Maryland vs Buie

Protective Sweeps

A protective sweep is legal and protects the arresting officer from danger posed by unknown third parties. The duration of the sweep is limited and can last no than necessary to dispel the suspicion of danger

Whren vs United States

Traffic Stops

The real purpose of a stop even if ulterior, does not render the stop and subsequent search invalid if there was, in fact, a valid reason for the stop, such as traffic violation 

Chimel  vs California

Search Incidental to Lawful Arrest

When making an aarrest, it is reasonable for an officer to search the person arrested to remove any weapons the latter might use to resist arrest of affect and escape. The search must be made simultaneously with the arrest and must be confined to the area within the immediate control of the suspect-that is, within his or her reach 

Hester vs United States 

Open Fields, Abandoned Property, Trash

If something is open to the public and has no expectation of privacy, it is not protected by the Fourth Amendment.  

Kylio vs United States

Thermal Imaging

Using a thermal imager to surveil a home is a seach under the Fourth Amendment and, as such, requires a search warrant based on probable cause

Michigan vs Tucker

Public Safety Exception

Miranda warnings are not themselves rights protected by constitution, but are measures to ensure that the right against compulsory self-incrimination is protected. On some facts there is a "public safety" exception to the requirement that Mirand warnings be given before a suspect answers me be admitted into evidence, and the availbality of the exception does not depend upon the motivation of the individual officer

Sorrels vs United States

Entrapment

Law enforcement may use traps, decoys and deception to obtain evidence of the commission of a crime. Resort to such means does not render an indictment thereafter found a nuullity nor call for the exclusion of evidence so procured