Wolf v. Colorado

broadened exclusionary rule saying it was a violation of 14th amendment  but states can make their decision of whether to apply it or not

Mapp v. Ohio

applies exclusionary rule to the states

Robinson v. California

cruel and unusual punishment

Klopfer v. North Carolina

right to a speedy trial

Malloy v. Hogan

self-incrimination

Washington v. Texas

compulsory process to obtain witnesses

Pointer v. Texas

Confront witnesses against the accused

Gideon v. Wainwright

Assistance of counsel

Katz v. United States

Any form of electronic surveillance, including wiretapping, that violates a reasonable expectation of privacy, constitutes a search under the 4th amendment. No physical trespass is required.

California v. Greenwood

A warrantless search and seizure of trash left for collection in an area accessible to the public is valid

United States v. White

made it legal to use recording a conversation between undercover agent and suspect instead of writing notes down right after

Kyllo v. United States

thermal imagers cannot be used without a warrant sense you cannot see the things with a naked eye that you are able to see with the thermal imager

Florida v. Royer

not a violation of 4th amendment for officers to approach an individual on the street or other public place, asking him to answer some questions does not make it a siezure, even after identifying themselves as an officer it is not a seizure

California v. Ciraolo

using a plane to view evidence is ok because it doesnt' enhance the vision, not a 4th amendment search, neither is taking pictures from a plane

California v. Hodari

Clarified seizure and detention, intention to arrest, authority to arrest, seizure and detention, understanding of the individual that he or she is being arrested

Terry v. Ohio

"Stop and Frisk" based upon reasonable suspicion are constitutional

Illinois v. Wardlow

if you are in a high crime area and run from the police they can stop you

United States v. Sokolow

Totality of circumstances in this case established a reasonable suspicion that the suspect was transporting illegal drugs hence the investigative without a warrant was valid

United States v. Sharpe and Savage

There is no rigid time limit for the length of an investigatory stop; instead, specific circumstances should be taken into account

Ascher v. Commissioner of Public Safety

Sobriety checkpoints are unconstitutional in Minnesota

United States v. Montoya de Hernandez

stops can occur for very long periods as long as the suspect makes it long and uncomfortable for themselves

Michigan v. Sitz

Sobriety checkpoints are stops to which the fourth amendment applies and requires no individualized suspicion because of the importance of the State's interest in addressing the drunk driving problem

Maryland v. Wilson

The supreme court held that a police officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop

Draper v. United States

Information from an informant that is corroborated by an officer may be sufficient to provide probable cause for an arrest even if such information is hearsay

Payton v. New York

the police may not validly enter a private home to make a routine, warrantless felony arrest, unless justified by exigent circumstances

Welsh v. Wisconsin

Warrantless nighttime entry of a suspect's home to affect an arrest for a non-jailable offense violates the fourth amendment

Brigham City v. Stuart and Taylors

entry into a house without a warrant under exigent circumstances is ok

Tennessee v. Garner

cannot shoot a fleeing suspect unless there is a threat to the community and to yourself as an officer

Graham v. Conor

police officers may be held liable under the constitution for using excessive force. the test for liability is "objective reasonableness" rather than substantive due process

Kuha v. City of Minetonka

Officers using the "bite and Hold" method with a k-9 must warn prior to releasing

Atwater v. City of Lago Vista

4th amendment does not forbid a warrantless arrest for a minor criminal offense such as a misdemeanor seatbelt violation, punishable only be a fine

Wilson v. Arkansas

4th amendment requires officers to knock and announce before entering a dwelling unless there are exigent circumstances

Chimel v. California

after arrest police may search the area within a person's immediate control

Arizona v. Gant

police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search and reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest

Knowles v. Iowa

Officers may search a vehicle incident to an arrest but a search incident to the issuance of a traffic citation, absent consent or probable cause, violates the fourth amendment

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte

voluntariness of consent to search is determined from the totality of circumstances, of which consent is only one element

Carroll v. United States

Warrantless search of an automobile is valid if probable cause is present

United States v. Rodney

A "frisk" or consent search of the body includes all regions of the body including the crotch area

Lanza v. New York

jail shares none of the attributes of a home, automobile, an office or hotel room, and official surveillance has traditionally been the order in prisons

Bull and others v. City and County of San Fransico

visual strip searches of jail inmates going into general population are valid to preserve the safety and security of the facility

Colorado v. Bertine

warrantless inventory searches of the person and possessions of arrested individuals are permissible under the fourth amendment

State v. Ellis

officers should get a warrant before entering college dorm rooms when they have probable cause to believe that contraband is within

South Dakota v. Opperman

Conducting an inventory search of an impounded vehicle for minor parking violations is reasonable

Samson v. California

4th amendment does not prohibit a police officer from conducting a suspicionless search of a parolee

Brown v. Mississippi

confessions obtained as a result of coercion and brutality by law enforcement officers violate the due process clause of the 14th amendment and therefore inadmissible in court

Escobedo v. Illinois

once the investigation focuses on particular suspect the prosecution has begun and the right to counsel ataches

Schmerber v. California

drawing blood from suspect without his or her consent is not a violation of any constitutional right as long as done by medical personnel using accepted medical methods

Miranda v. Arizona

Evidence obtained by police during custodial interrogation of a suspect is not admissible in a court to prove guilt unless the suspect was given the Miranda warnings and their is a valid waiver

Berkemer, Sheriff of franklin County v. McCarty

Mirand rule applies to all offenses except roadside traffic stops

New York v. Quarles

if eminent threat to officer or public safety exists officers do not have to read Miranda even though a suspect may be in custody

Colorado v. Connelly

statements made when the mental state of the defendant interfered with his "rational intellect" and "free will" are not automatically excluded. Their admissibility is governed by state rules of evidence

District Attorney's Office of the Third Judicial District and others v. William G. Osborne

The U.S. Supreme Court decided that there's no constitutional right of access to forensic evidence

State v. Clopten

if the defense requests to put an expert on the stand to explain eyewitness testimony the court should allow it

McFadden v. Cabana

even with height and weight differences in line-ups the courts will still allow the identification

Manson v. Brathwaite

the admission of testimony concerning a suggestive and unnecessary identification procedure does not violate due process as long as the identification possesses sufficient aspects of reliability

Neil v. Biggers

We must look at the totality of circumstances behind the witness identification to determine reliability

Gilbert v. California

identifications made without counsel after indictment should be excluded from trial

U.S. v. Wade

Court required lawyer after indictment during lineups

Weeks v. U.S.

applied exclusionary rule only to federal government

Silverthorne Lumber Co v. U.S.

broadened exclusionary rule, created fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine