Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Ortiz

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 30, 1975

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

45 entries 7 linked 38 unlinked
Show
  1. Schmerber Vs. California US Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1966
  2. Chambers Vs. Maroney US Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1970
  3. United States Vs. Biswell US Supreme Court · May 15, 1972
  4. United States Vs. Bowen US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1879
    Distinguished
  5. United States Vs. Martinez-fuerte US Supreme Court · Jul 06, 1976
  6. United States Vs. Brignoni-ponce US Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1975
  7. United States Vs. Baca US Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1902
  8. U.S. 891 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Ortiz
    Search
  9. U.S. 891 (1975) United States v. Ortiz
    Search
  10. equivalents, and for this purpose there is no difference between a checkpoint and a roving patrol. Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  11. the Ninth Circuit reversed the conviction in an unreported opinion, relying on dictum in its opinion in United States v. Bowen
    Search
  12. F.2d 960 (CA9 1974), aff'd, post, p. 422 U. S. 916 , to the effect that our decision in Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  13. Page 422 U. S. 893 record on the operation of traffic checkpoints in southern California. United States v. Baca
    Search
  14. highway between San Diego and Los Angeles, and over 10 million vehicles pass the checkpoint in a year. United States v. Martinez-Fuerte
    Search
  15. Amendment is to protect liberty and privacy from arbitrary and oppressive interference by government officials. Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  16. limit police use of unnecessarily frightening or offensive methods of surveillance and investigation. See, e.g., Terry v. Ohio
    Search
  17. be significant in determining the propriety of the stop, which is considerably less intrusive than a search, Terry v. Ohio
    Search
  18. whether there is probable cause to search a particular vehicle. In addition, as we note today in United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
    Search
  19. occurred after the date of decision in Almeida-Sanchez but before the Court of Appeals stated in United States v. Bowen
    Search
  20. inspects the enclosed portion as well. But an immigration inspection is not always so confined. In Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  21. Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  22. aliens, because the officers had no such warrant in this case and had not tried to obtain one. See Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  23. Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  24. at an established checkpoint without reason to believe that a particular vehicle is carrying aliens. Cf. United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
    Search
  25. of road use. MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, concurring. I joined the dissent of my Brother WHITE in Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  26. that a particular vehicle is involved in immigration violations, cf. United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
    Search
  27. account all the circumstances and balance the rights of the individual with the needs of society. See, e.g., Terry v. Ohio
    Search
  28. Elkins v. United
    Search
  29. This opinion applies also to No. 74-114, United States v Brignoni-Ponce
    Search
  30. The Court today recognizes that as many as 12 million illegal aliens are now present in this country. United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
    Search
  31. id. Dec. 9, 1974, p. 77. By all indications, the problem will increase in the future, not abate. United States v. Baca
    Search
  32. OF BURGER, C.J., CONCURRING IN THE JUDGMENT Excerpt from Judge Turrentine's opinion in United States v. Baca
    Search
  33. reflect in part a Congressional intent to protect the American labor market from an influx of foreign labor. Karnuth v. United
    Search
  34. into this country and becoming familiar with employment opportunities and practices in the United States. See Diaz v. Kay-Dix
    Search
  35. to be an alien as to his right to remain or to be in the United Page 422 U. S. 907 States. See Au Yi Lau v. I.N
    Search
  36. Given Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  37. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Ortiz
    Search
  38. California. United States v. Baca
    Search
  39. Terry v. Ohio
    Search
  40. In Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  41. See Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  42. Cf. United States v. Brignoni-Ponce
    Search
  43. Karnuth v. United
    Search
  44. the United States. See Diaz v. Kay-Dix
    Search
  45. States. See Au Yi Lau v. I.N
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial