Citation network
Brigham City Vs. Stuart
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 22, 2006
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
-
Syllabus October Term, 2005 Brigham City V. StuartSearch
-
emergency assistance to occupants of private property who are seriously injured or threatened with such injury. Mincey v. ArizonaSearch
-
subjective motivation is irrelevant, Bond v. UnitedSearch
-
kitchen to arrest respondents and gather evidence or to assist the injured and prevent further violence. Indianapolis v. EdmondSearch
-
U. S. 32 , 46, and Florida v. WellsSearch
-
s holding in Welsh v. WisconsinSearch
-
C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Stevens, J., filed a concurring opinion. Brigham City v. StuartSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Brigham City V. StuartSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 05-502 Brigham City, Utah, Petitioner V. CharlesSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
and People v. HebertSearch
-
with United States v. CervantesSearch
-
quoting People v. MitchellSearch
-
N. Y. 2d 173, 177, 347 N. E. 2d 607, 609 (1976)) and State v. MountfordSearch
-
U. S. 551 , 559 (2004) (quoting Payton v. NewSearch
-
the warrant requirement is subject to certain exceptions. Flippo v. WestSearch
-
Katz v. UnitedSearch
-
officers may make a warrantless entry onto private property to fight a fire and investigate its cause, Michigan v. TylerSearch
-
U. S. 499 , 509 (1978), to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence, Ker v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of a fleeing suspect, United States v. SantanaSearch
-
Id., at 392 (quoting Wayne v. UnitedSearch
-
see also Georgia v. RandolphSearch
-
Scott v. UnitedSearch
-
s subjective motivation is irrelevant. See Bond v. UnitedSearch
-
Whren v. UnitedSearch
-
is sometimes appropriate. Indianapolis v. EdmondSearch
-
see also Florida v. WellsSearch
-
intrusion into the home. They rely on Welsh v. WisconsinSearch
-
remand the case for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. Brigham City v. StuartSearch
-
Stevens, J., Concurring Brigham City V. StuartSearch
-
the Utah Constitution provides greater protection to the privacy of the home than does the Fourth Amendment. See State v. DebooySearch
-
Bond v. UnitedSearch
-
and Florida v. WellsSearch
-
Welsh v. WisconsinSearch
-
Brigham City, Utah, Petitioner V. CharlesSearch
-
People v. MitchellSearch
-
and State v. MountfordSearch
-
Payton v. NewSearch
-
Flippo v. WestSearch
-
Michigan v. TylerSearch
-
Ker v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Wayne v. UnitedSearch
-
Georgia v. RandolphSearch
-
See Bond v. UnitedSearch
-
Florida v. WellsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial