Case Brief Illinois V Wardlow - amazonia.fiocruz.br

Case Brief Illinois V Wardlow Video

Illinois v. McArthur Case Brief Summary - Law Case Explained

Case Brief Illinois V Wardlow - sorry

Official websites use. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Displaying 1 - 25 of Search Caption or Docket Number. I: General e. Ass'n v. Texas v. Case Brief Illinois V Wardlow.

Sarah A. At first glance, it may be puzzling that the U. Supreme Court Case Brief Illinois V Wardlow certiorari in Kansas v. Also curious is that, despite the longstanding mandate that the totality of the circumstances must be taken Case Brief Illinois V Wardlow account, the issue in the case rested on only Illinoiss stipulated facts:. The petitioner countered that relying solely on the stipulated facts to support reasonable suspicion amounted to a bright-line rule allowing the police to stop any car registered to an unlicensed owner. From the socio-legal perspective, Glover falls in a line of Supreme Court cases about the constitutional regulation of technology used in police work.

In fact, several amici in Glover warned of similar privacy concerns that had been raised in Carpenter v. United States [5] about collecting cellphone records and in United States v. Jones [6] Waddlow attaching GPS devices to cars. According to a survey, seventy-one percent of police departments used ALPRs, with more surely having adopted the technology in the nine years since. Many licenses are suspended or revoked not on public safety grounds but for a whole host of reasons that mainly have to do with poverty: failure to pay parking tickets, court fees and fines, or child support.

Additional site navigation

Notwithstanding the difficult privacy issues that technological changes pose, the question presented made Glover an easy case for the state to win before the Supreme Court, which it did in an 8—1 decision. Illonois fact, the Terry line of cases has only exacerbated the problem of discriminatory and unequal policing. But it is not farfetched that poor people with suspended licenses would keep driving. Most people drive to work.

You are here

When their licenses are suspended, poor people often find themselves in a bind: They need to hold down a job to pay off their criminal-justice Casd so that they can reinstate their licenses, but without a license, they cannot hold down a job. Making matters worse, poor people tend to live farther away from job-rich metropolitan areas and must commute from lower-income suburbs. Outside New York City, American life—from the mundane like buying groceries or taking children to school, to Case Brief Illinois V Wardlow vital like getting medical care or attending religious services—practically requires driving a car. Some can depend on friends and family for rides, but many others have no choice but to keep driving.

Search form

So long as there is reasonable suspicion that a motorist may be driving without a license, an officer can conduct a brief investigatory stop. Justice Sotomayor, in her dissent, took a different tack.

It is true that Terry v. She had three cars registered in her name; she drove one of them, while her husband and daughter drove the other two. It suggests that while a given set of facts might seem innocent to the layperson or judge, a trained officer would know better.]