Citation network
Maryland Vs. Buie
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 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
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 325 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Maryland v. BuieSearch
-
U.S. 325 (1990) Maryland v. BuieSearch
-
facts that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene. Michigan v. LongSearch
-
no longer than it takes to complete the arrest and depart the premises. Pp. 494 U. S. 331 -336. (b) Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U. S. 1032 , 463 U. S. 1049 -1050 (1983) (quoting Terry v. OhioSearch
-
Payton v. NewSearch
-
officer had probable cause to believe was evidence of a crime, was also lawful under the Fourth Amendment. See Arizona v. HicksSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
brightline rule, the State contends that protective sweeps fall within the ambit of the doctrine announced in Terry v. OhioSearch
-
III It goes without saying that the Fourth Amendment bars only unreasonable searches and seizures, Skinner v. RailwaySearch
-
the individual's Fourth Amendment interests against its promotion of legitimate governmental interests. United States v. Villamonte-MarquezSearch
-
New Jersey v. T.LSearch
-
Id. at 392 U. S. 21 (quoting Camara v. MunicipalSearch
-
Ibid. In Michigan v. LongSearch
-
longer than it takes to complete the arrest and depart the premises. IV Affirmance is not required by Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Brief for Petitioner 23, is rebutted by Terry v. OhioSearch
-
applied to the protective sweep of a house. We reject the State's attempts to analogize this case to Pennsylvania v. MimmsSearch
-
U. S. 106 (1977) (per curiam), and Michigan v. SummersSearch
-
was less severe and much less susceptible to exploitation than a protective sweep. A more analogous case is Ybarra v. IllinoisSearch
-
Our reliance on the cursory nature of the search is not inconsistent with our statement in Arizona v. HicksSearch
-
task on remand. However, the Maryland courts are better equipped than are we to review the record. See, e.g., Buie v. StateSearch
-
Cf. United States v. HastingSearch
-
test, Buie v. StateSearch
-
Justice BRENNAN, with whom Justice MARSHALL joins, dissenting. Today the Court for the first time extends Terry v. OhioSearch
-
United States v. UnitedSearch
-
relied on Terry to relax the warrant and probable requirements for both searches of places, e.g., New York v. ClassSearch
-
and seizures of personal effects, e.g., New Jersey v. T.LSearch
-
to the police during Buie's arrest thus does not diminish his privacy interest in the remaining rooms. See Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
-
exception previously recognized in Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Maryland v. BuieSearch
-
Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
-
the Fourth Amendment. See Arizona v. HicksSearch
-
Skinner v. RailwaySearch
-
Camara v. MunicipalSearch
-
Pennsylvania v. MimmsSearch
-
and Michigan v. SummersSearch
-
Ybarra v. IllinoisSearch
-
Arizona v. HicksSearch
-
Buie v. StateSearch
-
See Chimel v. CaliforniaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial