| cheapbag214s |
 Posted: Sat 13:51, 27 Jul 2013 Post subject: as it was about |
|
| violate the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court took the Bailey case to settle that disagreement.The justices can be placed on a spectrum in terms of the way they handle Fourth Amendment cases. At one end is Justice Scalia. At the other is Justice Alito.The briefing in the case is top-notch. As you might expect, the parties spend a lot of time arguing over whether the interests that form the basis of Summers justify seizures of departing occupants. The briefing also reveals interesting strategic choices. Bailey pins his hopes on a 2009 decision, Arizona v. Gant,tory burch outlet, which addressed whether police can search a car after arresting and handcuffing the driver. In a 5-4 decision, the Court essentially overruled an earlier case and held that such searches were generally impermissible,fitflops sale, concluding that the purported justifications -- ensuring police safety and preserving evidence -- simply didn't apply when the arrestee was handcuffed in the back of a squadcar. Gant isn't directly on point as a legal matter, as it was about |
|
