Citation network
illinois Vs. Gates
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 08, 1983
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. 213 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Illinois v. GatesSearch
-
U.S. 213 (1983) Illinois v. GatesSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
were inadequate to sustain a determination of probable cause for issuance of the search warrant under Aguilar v. TexasSearch
-
U. S. 108 , and Spinelli v. UnitedSearch
-
corroboration of details of an informant's tip by independent police work is of significant value. Cf. Draper v. UnitedSearch
-
to search the Gateses' property Page 462 U. S. 217 was inadequate under this Court's decisions in Aguilar v. TexasSearch
-
U. S. 108 (1964), and Spinelli v. UnitedSearch
-
the rule requiring the exclusion at a criminal trial of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
a federal question had been both raised and decided in the state court below. As Justice Story wrote in Crowell v. RandellSearch
-
See also Owings v. Norwood'sSearch
-
More recently, in McGoldrick v. CompagnieSearch
-
in state court in State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. DuelSearch
-
Hill v. CaliforniaSearch
-
rule as merely a prudential restriction. In Terminiello v. ChicagoSearch
-
reversed a state criminal conviction on a ground not urged in state court, nor even in this Court. Likewise, in Vachon v. NewSearch
-
be unclear whether the particular federal question presented in this Court was raised or passed upon below. In Dewey v. DesSearch
-
McGoldrick v. CompagnieSearch
-
supra, at 394 U. S. 439 . Illinois, for example, adopted an exclusionary rule as early as 1923, see People v. BrocampSearch
-
federal exclusionary rule -- suppressing evidence against respondents -- does not affect our conclusion. In Morrison v. WatsonSearch
-
Amendment rights of the party seeking to invoke the rule were violated by police conduct. See, e.g., United States v. HavensSearch
-
of the judgment. Dewey v. DesSearch
-
November 29, 1982. The extent of the continued vitality of the rules that have developed from our decisions in Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 232 U. S. 383 (1914), and Mapp v. OhioSearch
-
evidence of this lies just in the comments on the issue that Members of this Court recently have made, e.g., Bivens v. SixSearch
-
Coolidge v. NewSearch
-
that there was probable cause to believe that contraband would be found in the Gateses' home and car. See Aguilar v. TexasSearch
-
Nathanson v. UnitedSearch
-
S. 228 the anonymous letter with information sufficient to permit a determination of probable cause. See Whiteley v. WardenSearch
-
derived from our decision in Spinelli v. UnitedSearch
-
Brinegar v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 338 U. S. 175 . Our observation in United States v. CortezSearch
-
Informants' tips doubtless come in many shapes and sizes from many different types of persons. As we said in Adams v. WilliamsSearch
-
reliability of a tip, by a strong showing as to the other, or by some other indicia of reliability. See, e.g., Adams v. WilliamsSearch
-
United States v. HarrisSearch
-
surely should not serve as an absolute bar to a finding of probable cause based on his tip. See United States v. SellersSearch
-
we have found Page 462 U. S. 234 rigorous scrutiny of the basis of his knowledge unnecessary. Adams v. WilliamsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial