Citation network
Stoner Vs. California
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 31, 1969
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 483 (1969) U.S. Supreme Court Stoner v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U.S. 483 (1964) Stoner v. CaliforniaSearch
-
as incident to arrest only if substantially contemporaneous and confined to the immediate vicinity of arrest. Agnello v. UnitedSearch
-
facts brought it within one of the exceptions to the rule that a search must rest upon a search warrant. Jones v. UnitedSearch
-
Rios v. UnitedSearch
-
it is substantially contemporaneous with the arrest, and is confined to the immediate vicinity of the arrest. Agnello v. UnitedSearch
-
Nevada, on October 29. The search was completely unrelated to the arrest, both as to time and as to place. See Preston v. UnitedSearch
-
Jones v. UnitedSearch
-
to permit an otherwise unlawful police search of a hotel room to rest upon consent of the hotel proprietor. Lustig v. UnitedSearch
-
Chapman v. UnitedSearch
-
of their landlords. No less than a tenant of a house, or the occupant of a room in a boarding house, McDonald v. UnitedSearch
-
a guest in a hotel room is entitled to constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Johnson v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
unlawful. Since evidence obtained through the search was admitted at the trial, the judgment must be reversed. Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
was committed, as well as weapons and other things to effect an escape from custody, is not to be doubted. See Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 267 U. S. 132 , 267 U. S. 158 , Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 269 U. S. 30 . See also Ker v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Lustig v. UnitedSearch
-
in Agnello defining the permissible bounds of a search incident to arrest went too far, see, e.g., Harris v. UnitedSearch
-
to the arrest 'for it was at a distance from the place thereof and was not contemporaneous therewith.' ( Castaneda v. SuperiorSearch
-
Tompkins v. SuperiorSearch
-
People v. GorgSearch
-
People v. KingSearch
-
See Roberts v. CaseySearch
-
Fox v. WindemereSearch
-
People v. VaughanSearch
-
People v. BurkeSearch
-
of Appeal so that it may consider whether or not admission of the illegally seized evidence was harmless error. Fahy v. ConnecticutSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Stoner v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Agnello v. UnitedSearch
-
See Preston v. UnitedSearch
-
McDonald v. UnitedSearch
-
Johnson v. UnitedSearch
-
Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
See Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
Ker v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Harris v. UnitedSearch
-
Castaneda v. SuperiorSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial