Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

Smith Vs. Ohio

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 05, 1990

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

30 entries 5 linked 25 unlinked
Show
  1. Chimel Vs. California US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1969
  2. Rawlings Vs. Kentucky US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1980
  3. Rhodes Vs. Stewart US Supreme Court · Oct 17, 1988
  4. Commissioner Vs. Mccoy US Supreme Court · Oct 19, 1987
  5. United States Vs. Place US Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1983
  6. U.S. 541 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Smith v. Ohio
    Search
  7. U.S. 541 (1990) Smith v. Ohio
    Search
  8. the officer's reaching for the bag involved a self-protective action necessary for the officer's safety. See Terry v. Ohio
    Search
  9. that it contains contraband or evidence of criminal activity, United States v. Place
    Search
  10. of that property unless accomplished pursuant to judicial warrant issued upon probable cause. See, e.g., Skinner v. Railway
    Search
  11. Katz v. United
    Search
  12. petitioner's Page 494 U. S. 543 bag under the exception for searches incident to arrest. See United States v. Chadwick
    Search
  13. Johnson v. United
    Search
  14. Sibron v. New
    Search
  15. Henry v. United
    Search
  16. contends that petitioner abandoned the bag when he threw it on his car and turned to face Officer Thomas. See Abel v. United
    Search
  17. Hester v. United
    Search
  18. respond to a police officer's inquiry, Page 494 U. S. 544 clearly has not abandoned that property. Cf. Rios v. United
    Search
  19. opportunity to be heard on the merits and significantly increase the risk of an erroneous decision. See Pennsylvania v. Bruder
    Search
  20. Buchanan v. Stanships
    Search
  21. U.S. Supreme Court Smith v. Ohio
    Search
  22. See Terry v. Ohio
    Search
  23. Skinner v. Railway
    Search
  24. See United States v. Chadwick
    Search
  25. Henry v. United
    Search
  26. Officer Thomas. See Abel v. United
    Search
  27. Cf. Rios v. United
    Search
  28. See Pennsylvania v. Bruder
    Search
  29. Mincey v. Arizona
    Search
  30. United States v. Ross
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales