Did you mean: US v. Riley et al ?
Web Results

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California

Riley v. California, 573 U.S. __ (2014) is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that the warrantless search and seizure of digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional. The case arose from a split among state and federal courts over the cell phone search  ...

www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/16-402-op-bel-6th-cir.pdf

Apr 13, 2016 ... United States v. Carpenter, et al. Page 2. KETHLEDGE, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which GUY, J., joined. STRANCH, J., joined the opinion in part and the result in part. STRANCH, J. (pp. 17–22), delivered a separate opinion joining in Parts II.B and III of the majority opinion and concurring.

www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-132_8l9c.pdf

Jun 25, 2014 ... RILEY v. CALIFORNIA. Syllabus. First Circuit reversed the denial of the motion to suppress and vacat- ed the relevant convictions. Held: The police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone ..... Investigative Agencies et al. as Amici Curiae in No. 13–. 132, pp. 9–10; see ...

www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/13-132

Jun 25, 2014 ... In No. 13–132, petitioner Riley was stopped for a traffic violation, which eventually led to his arrest on weapons charges. An officer searching Riley incident to the arrest seized a cell phone from Riley's pants pocket. The officer accessed information on the phone and noticed the repeated use of a term ...

epic.org/amicus/cell-phone/riley

The court found individuals have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their cell phone location data, based on the Supreme Court's recent decisions in United States v. Jones and Riley v. California. These records, the court found, can be even "more invasive" than the "GPS device attached to the defendant's car in Jones.

www.caaflog.com/category/september-2012-term/united-states-v-riley

United States v. Miller, 63 M.J. 452, 459 (C.A.A.F. 2006). Unfortunately, Riley's defense counsel “was not aware of the [sex offender registration] requirement or consequence for such a kidnapping conviction.” Slip op. at 5. Additionally, the military judge did not address sex offender registration during the plea inquiry.

www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR315/315CR24.pdf

Mar 10, 2015 ... Most recently, in Miller v. Alabama,. U.S.. , 132. S. Ct. 2455, 2460, 183 L. Ed. 2d 407 (2012), the court held that mandatory sentencing schemes that impose a term of life imprisonment without parole on juvenile homicide offenders, thus precluding consideration of the offender's youth as mitigating against ...

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/488/445.html

Case opinion for US Supreme Court FLORIDA v. RILEY. Read the Court's full decision on FindLaw. ... [ Footnote * ] Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the State of Indiana et al. by Linley E. Pearson, Attorney General of Indiana, and Lisa M. Paunicka, Deputy Attorney General, Don Siegelman, Attorney General ...

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-5th-circuit/1061344.html

Jan 9, 2004 ... UNITED STATES of America, ex rel. Joyce RILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ST. LUKE'S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants, St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital ; Branislav Radovancevic, Dr.; O. Howard Frazier, M.D.; Surgical Associates of Texas, P.A.; Baylor College of Medicine; Texas Heart Institute; Edward ...