California v. Hodari D.
Significance, When Questioning Is Seizure, An Erosion Of Fourth Amendment Rights?, Impact
State of California
That police officials' use of materials discarded by a fleeing suspect prior to a warrantless arrest does not violate Fourth Amendment search and seizure standards.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Kenneth Winston Starr, U.S. Solicitor General
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Paul L. Hoffman
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas, Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun, Sandra Day O'Connor, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
15 June 1992
Upheld California's claim and overturned a lower court's decision prohibiting use of evidence obtained without a search warrant prior to illegal seizure of the suspect.
- Alberty v. United States, 162 U.S. 499 (1896).
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967).
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (1983).
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1988).
- Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (1991).
- Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt. Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1997.
- LaFave, Wayne R. Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment, 3rd Edition. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co., 1996.
- Cammermeyer v. Aspin - Significance, A Military Discharge, Summary Judgment, Legitimate But Not Rational, Impact
- California v. Acevedo - Significance, A Uniform Rule For Vehicle Searches, Dissent Finds Warrantless Search Unacceptable, Impact, Kids, Drugs, And Crime
- California v. Hodari D. - Significance
- California v. Hodari D. - When Questioning Is Seizure
- California v. Hodari D. - An Erosion Of Fourth Amendment Rights?
- California v. Hodari D. - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias