Quotes About Probable cause

You don't need any indictment in order to arrest someone; probable cause is sufficient to arrest civilians, so it must be enough to arrest police.

If the courts regarded tweets and other social media information as private, it would not prevent the law enforcement from getting information it really needs. But the government would have to get a search warrant, which requires it to show that it has probable cause connecting what is being searched to a crime.

To get a FISA warrant to spy on a suspected spy, the feds go before a super-secret court located in a sealed room in the Department of Justice. With no defense lawyers present, they need only show probable cause that the target is an 'agent of a foreign power' engaged in intelligence gathering against the United States.

Either we need to redefine what probable cause means and say that police are not subject to it, or we arrest officers right away just as we would with any other person accused of committing a crime. Either we write new laws or enforce existing ones; we cannot have it both ways.

So you don't speak English, you have no ID, you can't tell where you're from... that's suspicion, it's lower than probable cause. And then we have a right to call immigration and check you out.

It all comes down to probable cause: If you think something's up, maybe you gotta take a look.

A person's mere propinquity to others independently suspected of criminal activity does not give rise to probable cause to search that person.

Rule of law is based on probable cause.

Let me guess," Sloane said, though his recollection of criminal law was fuzzy. "Kozlowski ruled there was no probable cause for the initial decision to search the trunk of the car.

Civilian notions about unreasonable search and seizure and warrants and probable cause stop at an army post main gate.

The right of the people to be secure… against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.

Quality-of-life policing is based on probable cause - an officer has witnessed a crime personally or has a witness to the crime.

In Ferguson, there are witnesses who say Brown had his hands up when he was shot. That should be enough probable cause to go to trial to then determine if Officer Wilson is guilty or not. It is at trial that he can then defend himself and his attorneys can present their own witnesses and their own defense.

The Court held that police may obtain cellular location information—information that can be used to determine where a person was at a particular time—only if they have a warrant based on probable cause or if emergency circumstances justify allowing the search without a warrant.

a reasonable search for weapons for the protection of the police officer, where he has reason to believe that he is dealing with an armed and dangerous individual, regardless of whether he has probable cause to arrest the individual for a crime."28

That the search violated the Fourth Amendment was undisputed—it had been done without probable cause. But the Supreme Court ruled that the evidence was nonetheless admissible at trial.

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte is important on many levels. First, it dramatically empowers police to be able to search. It obviates the need for police to meet all the requirements of the Fourth Amendment, such as the need for probable cause (or at least reasonable suspicion) and the need for a warrant. It is estimated that consent searches comprise over 90 percent of all warrantless searches.

Miller says that when police obtain information that a person has shared with a third party, it is not a search. Therefore, the requirements for probable cause and a warrant—the key protections of privacy under the Fourth Amendment—do not apply or need to be met.

The automobile exception provides that police may search a car without a warrant when they have probable cause that it may contain contraband or evidence of illegal activity.

Chambers, the Supreme Court invoked the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment and said "automobiles and other conveyances may be searched without a warrant in circumstances that would not justify the search without a warrant of a house or an office" if officers have probable cause to believe that the car contains articles that they are entitled to seize.

The purpose of the stop had obviously been to look for drugs, but the police had had no reasonable suspicion, let alone probable cause, to justify a stop for that kind of crime. They had stopped the car for a minor traffic violation patently as an excuse to search for drugs.

The actual motivation of the officers is irrelevant.18 As long as an officer has probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion, that a traffic law has been violated, he or she may stop the vehicle.

Do we want a back door in an iPhone where the government can go in to track movements if they have probable cause? I know the director of the FBI and local law enforcement want that capability.

The prosecutors went through this relying on the probable cause affidavit [which they filed with the court in charging Zimmerman.] They were prepared to accept the judge's ruling, rather than make an all out effort to defeat bond by putting their best evidence forward. Because if they had done that, the defense would have had a preview of their case and still wouldn't have had bond denied." -On the Trayvon Martin Trial