Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/United_States_v._Matlock> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 40 of
40
with 100 items per page.
- United_States_v._Matlock abstract "United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974) was a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures was not violated when the police obtained voluntary consent from a third party who possessed common authority over the premises sought to be searched. The ruling of the court established the "co-occupant consent rule," which was later explained by Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990) and distinguished by Georgia v. Randolph (2006), in which the court held that a third party could not consent over the objections of a present co-occupant.".
- United_States_v._Matlock wikiPageExternalLink 164.html.
- United_States_v._Matlock wikiPageID "4505840".
- United_States_v._Matlock wikiPageRevisionID "585637150".
- United_States_v._Matlock arguedate "--12-10".
- United_States_v._Matlock argueyear "1973".
- United_States_v._Matlock citation "172800.0".
- United_States_v._Matlock decidedate "--02-20".
- United_States_v._Matlock decideyear "1974".
- United_States_v._Matlock dissent "Brennan".
- United_States_v._Matlock dissent "Douglas".
- United_States_v._Matlock fullname "United States v. William Earl Matlock".
- United_States_v._Matlock hasPhotoCollection United_States_v._Matlock.
- United_States_v._Matlock holding "When the prosecution seeks to justify a warrantless search by proof of voluntary consent it is not limited to proof that consent was given by the defendant, but may show that permission to search was obtained from a third party who possessed common authority over or other sufficient relationship to the premises or effects sought to be inspected. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded.".
- United_States_v._Matlock join "Majority=Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist".
- United_States_v._Matlock joindissent "Marshall".
- United_States_v._Matlock lawsapplied Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution.
- United_States_v._Matlock litigants "United States v. Matlock".
- United_States_v._Matlock majority "White".
- United_States_v._Matlock prior "17280.0".
- United_States_v._Matlock scotus "1972".
- United_States_v._Matlock uspage "164".
- United_States_v._Matlock usvol "415".
- United_States_v._Matlock subject Category:1974_in_United_States_case_law.
- United_States_v._Matlock subject Category:United_States_Fourth_Amendment_case_law.
- United_States_v._Matlock subject Category:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases.
- United_States_v._Matlock type Case.
- United_States_v._Matlock type LegalCase.
- United_States_v._Matlock type SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase.
- United_States_v._Matlock type UnitOfWork.
- United_States_v._Matlock type Event.
- United_States_v._Matlock type Situation.
- United_States_v._Matlock comment "United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974) was a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures was not violated when the police obtained voluntary consent from a third party who possessed common authority over the premises sought to be searched. The ruling of the court established the "co-occupant consent rule," which was later explained by Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S.".
- United_States_v._Matlock label "United States v. Matlock".
- United_States_v._Matlock sameAs m.0c61c5.
- United_States_v._Matlock sameAs Q7893391.
- United_States_v._Matlock sameAs Q7893391.
- United_States_v._Matlock wasDerivedFrom United_States_v._Matlock?oldid=585637150.
- United_States_v._Matlock isPrimaryTopicOf United_States_v._Matlock.
- United_States_v._Matlock name "United States v. William Earl Matlock".