Citation network
Zurcher Vs. Stanford Daily
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 31, 1978
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
-
Zurcher v. StanfordSearch
-
Daily - 436 U.S. 547 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Zurcher v. StanfordSearch
-
Daily, 436 U.S. 547 (1978) Zurcher v. StanfordSearch
-
Fisher v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 425 U. S. 391 , 425 U. S. 400 (1976). In Camara v. MunicipalSearch
-
as a constitutional matter, they need not even name the person from whom the things will be seized. United States v. KahnSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
of the place to be searched and on the State's right to arrest him. The cases are to the contrary. Prior to Camara v. MunicipalSearch
-
Court, supra, and See v. SeattleSearch
-
Camara v. MunicipalSearch
-
We have suggested nothing to the contrary since Camara and See. Indeed, Colonnade Catering Corp. v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 397 U. S. 72 (1970), and United States v. BiswellSearch
-
In Carroll v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 267 U. S. 162 . See also Husty v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. ManufacturersSearch
-
Nat. Bank of Detroit, 536 F.2d 699, 703 (1976), cert. denied sub nom. Wingate v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 429 U.S. 1039 (1977). Accord, State v. TunnelSearch
-
Marcus v. SearchSearch
-
U. S. 496 , 413 U. S. 501 (1973). Hence, in Stanford v. TexasSearch
-
A Quantity of Books v. KansasSearch
-
Heller v. NewSearch
-
warrant issued in this case authorized nothing of this sort. Nor are we convinced, any more than we were in Branzburg v. HayesSearch
-
imposing a prior restraint upon free expression is invalid for want of notice and opportunity for a hearing, Carroll v. PrincessSearch
-
only after an adversary hearing and a judicial Page 436 U. S. 567 finding of obscenity. A Quantity of Books v. KansasSearch
-
warrant for use at a criminal trial. Not every such seizure, and not even most, will impose a prior restraint. Heller v. NewSearch
-
Together with No. 76-1600, Bergna, District Attorney of Santa Clara County, et al. v. StanfordSearch
-
Owens v. WaySearch
-
Newberry v. CarpenterSearch
-
People v. CarverSearch
-
and Commodity Mfg. Co. v. MooreSearch
-
for the proposition arrived at by the District Court and urged by respondents. The District Court also drew upon Bacon v. UnitedSearch
-
privilege against self-incrimination in response to a summons to produce evidence or give testimony. See Maness v. MeyersSearch
-
any individual who might be incriminated by the evidence in connection with which the privilege is asserted. Hoffman v. UnitedSearch
-
deterrent to improper searches of premises in the control of nonsuspects. 353 F.Supp. 124, 131-132 (1972). In Alderman v. UnitedSearch
-
the deterrence provided by the existing rules of standing is insufficient to discourage illegal searches. Cf. Warden v. HaydenSearch
-
the legality of a search and seizure may be challenged by anyone against whom evidence thus obtained is used. Kaplan v. SuperiorSearch
-
The concurring opinion in Branzburg v. HayesSearch
-
important information can often be obtained only by an assurance that the source will not be revealed. Branzburg v. HayesSearch
-
constitutionally protected function of the press to gather news and report it to the public. II In Branzburg v. HayesSearch
-
See Mills v. AlabamaSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Zurcher v. StanfordSearch
-
In Camara v. MunicipalSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial