Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Maryland Vs. Pringle

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Dec 15, 2003

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

35 entries 1 linked 34 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Sokolow US Supreme Court · Apr 03, 1989
  2. Syllabus October Term, 2003 Maryland V. Pringle
    Search
  3. Supreme Court of the United States Maryland V. Pringle
    Search
  4. Brinegar v. United
    Search
  5. U. S. 160 , 175, and that belief must be particularized with respect to the person to be searched or seized, Ybarra v. Illinois
    Search
  6. probable cause. Ornelas v. United
    Search
  7. s attempt to characterize this as a guilt-by-association case is unavailing. Ybarra v. Illinois
    Search
  8. reversed and remanded. Rehnquist, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Maryland v. Pringle
    Search
  9. Opinion of the Court Maryland V. Pringle
    Search
  10. Supreme Court of the United States No. 02-809 Maryland, Petitioner V. Joseph
    Search
  11. under arrest and transported to the police station. Later that morning, Pringle waived his rights under Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  12. and now reverse. Under the Fourth Amendment, made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, Mapp v. Ohio
    Search
  13. s presence, is consistent with the Fourth Amendment if the arrest is supported by probable cause. United States v. Watson
    Search
  14. see Atwater v. Lago
    Search
  15. see, e.g. , Ornelas v. United
    Search
  16. and that the belief of guilt must be particularized with respect to the person to be searched or seized, Ybarra v. Illinois
    Search
  17. U. S. 85 , 91 (1979). In Illinois v. Gates
    Search
  18. As early as Locke v. United
    Search
  19. s attempt to characterize this case as a guilt-by-association case is unavailing. His reliance on Ybarra v. Illinois
    Search
  20. suspected of criminal activity does not, without more, give rise to probable cause to search that person. Sibron v. New
    Search
  21. Ybarra . Pringle and his two companions were in a relatively small automobile, not a public tavern. In Wyoming v. Houghton
    Search
  22. than as a factor in the totality of the circumstances, is mistaken in light of our precedents. See, e.g., Illinois v. Gates
    Search
  23. Ybarra v. Illinois
    Search
  24. Ornelas v. United
    Search
  25. Court. Maryland v. Pringle
    Search
  26. Maryland, Petitioner V. Joseph
    Search
  27. Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  28. the Fourteenth Amendment, Mapp v. Ohio
    Search
  29. Atwater v. Lago
    Search
  30. In Illinois v. Gates
    Search
  31. Locke v. United
    Search
  32. Sibron v. New
    Search
  33. In Wyoming v. Houghton
    Search
  34. Illinois v. Gates
    Search
  35. United States v. Watson
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial