Citation network
Kolender Vs. Lawson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 02, 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. 352 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Kolender v. LawsonSearch
-
U.S. 352 (1983) Kolender v. LawsonSearch
-
officer who has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity sufficient to justify a stop under the standards of Terry v. OhioSearch
-
presence when requested by a peace officer under circumstances that would justify a stop under the standards of Terry v. OhioSearch
-
Hoffman Estates v. FlipsideSearch
-
People v. SolomonSearch
-
is prohibited and in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. Hoffman Estates v. FlipideSearch
-
Grayned v. CitySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Papachristou v. CitySearch
-
Connally v. GeneralSearch
-
e). Shuttlesworth v. CitySearch
-
e) implicates consideration of the constitutional right to freedom of movement. See Kent v. DullesSearch
-
Aptheker v. SecretarySearch
-
Smith, supra, at 415 U. S. 575 (quoting Gregory v. ChicagoSearch
-
Papachristou, 405 U.S. at 405 U. S. 170 (quoting Thornhill v. AlabamaSearch
-
Lewis v. CitySearch
-
Brown v. TexasSearch
-
legislation that would otherwise fail to meet constitutional standards for definiteness and clarity. See Lanzetta v. NewSearch
-
of clarity, see United States v. PetrilloSearch
-
have apparently never challenged the propriety of declaratory and injunctive relief in this case. See Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
e). See Ellis v. DysonSearch
-
In Wainwright v. StoneSearch
-
statute as though it read precisely as the highest court of the State has interpreted it.' Minnesota ex rel. Pearson v. ProbateSearch
-
Ninth Circuit noted in its decision that the state intermediate appellate court has construed the statute in People v. SolomonSearch
-
The Solomon court apparently read Terry v. OhioSearch
-
suspicion of criminal activity based on objective facts, Fourth Amendment concerns would be implicated. See Brown v. TexasSearch
-
In People v. CaylorSearch
-
Our concern for minimal guidelines finds its roots as far back as our decision in United States v. ReeseSearch
-
Second, where a statute imposes criminal penalties, the standard of certainty is higher. See Winters v. NewSearch
-
a criminal statute on its face even when it could conceivably have had some valid application. See, e.g., Colautti v. FranklinSearch
-
Lanzetta v. NewSearch
-
have traditionally viewed vagueness and overbreadth as logically related and similar doctrines. See, e.g., Keyishian v. BoardSearch
-
its argument about facial challenges in the arbitrary enforcement context. The dissent relies heavily on Parker v. LevySearch
-
Davis v. MississippiSearch
-
of these other issues would decide constitutional questions in advance of the necessity of doing so. See Burton v. UnitedSearch
-
Liverpool, N.Y. & P. S.S. Co. v. CommissionersSearch
-
of Emigration, 113 U. S. 33 , 113 U. S. 39 (1885). See also Ashwander v. TVASearch
-
e) permits arrests on less than probable cause. See Michigan v. DeFillippoSearch
-
of law enforcement and by the limited extent of the resulting intrusion on individual liberty and privacy. See Davis v. MississippiSearch
-
the probable cause requirement for seizures of the person has been defined by a series of cases, beginning with Terry v. OhioSearch
-
of the suspect to protect himself from concealed weapons. See, e.g., United States v. Brignoni-PonceSearch
-
Adam v. WilliamsSearch
-
Dunaway v. NewSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial