Citation network
Abel Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 28, 1960
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
-
Abel v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 362 U.S. 217 (1960) U.S. Supreme Court Abel v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 362 U.S. 217 (1960) Abel v. UnitedSearch
-
between two branches of a single Department of Justice as revealed in this case, see the story told in Colyer v. SkeffingtonSearch
-
in reported litigation. Two lower court cases involved oblique challenges, which were summarily rejected. Podolski v. BairdSearch
-
Ex parte Avakian, 188 F. 688, 692. See also the discussion in Colyer v. SkeffingtonSearch
-
F. 17, reversed on other grounds sub nom. Skeffington v. KatzeffSearch
-
Bilokumsky v. TodSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 524 . In Carlson v. LandonSearch
-
search, they should have been suppressed as the fruits of activity in violation of the Fourth Amendment. E.g., Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
evidence may not be seized, no matter how lawful the search which Page 362 U. S. 235 discovers them, Gouled v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 310 , nor may the Government seize, wholesale, the contents of a house it might have searched, Kremen v. UnitedSearch
-
on the Court. This is not the occasion to attempt to reconcile all the decisions, or to reexamine them. Compare Marron v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 275 U. S. 192 , with Go-Bart Importing Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 282 U. S. 344 , and United States v. LefkowitzSearch
-
Harris v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 331 U. S. 145 , and United States v. RabinowitzSearch
-
Trupiano v. UnitedSearch
-
justification here as it has in the case of an arrest for crime, where it has been recognized as proper. E.g., Agnello v. UnitedSearch
-
to his work as a spy. Documents used as a means to commit crime are the proper subjects of search warrants, Gouled v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 255 U. S. 298 , and are seizable when discovered in the course of a lawful search, Marron v. UnitedSearch
-
which justify a search of the person of one who is arrested. It is to be noted that this is not a case, like Kremen v. UnitedSearch
-
Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
vacantia. There can be nothing unlawful in the Government's appropriation of such abandoned property. See Hester v. UnitedSearch
-
the power of administrative officers -- as distinguished from police -- to enter and search peoples' homes was Frank v. MarylandSearch
-
for the police, who are thus saved the nuisance of getting a warrant. We need not go far to find examples. In Maryland v. PettifordSearch
-
made on June 21. The FBI had plenty of time to get a search warrant, as much if not more time than they had in Johnson v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 333 U. S. 10 , and Kremen v. UnitedSearch
-
Olmstead v. UnitedSearch
-
In Rea v. UnitedSearch
-
the Fourth Amendment is removed from an important segment of our life. We today forget what the Court said in Johnson v. UnitedSearch
-
in the Sixth Amendments also protects them. See Wong Wing v. UnitedSearch
-
times. Lifting the requirements of the Fourth Amendment for the benefit of health inspectors was accomplished by Frank v. MarylandSearch
-
to determine whether aliens will be entitled to release on bail pending deportation hearings is another. See Carlson v. LandonSearch
-
Court of Baltimore City was sustained by the Supreme Court of the United States in a five to four decision. Frank v. MarylandSearch
-
The security of one's privacy against arbitrary intrusion by the police . . . is basic to a free society.' Wolf v. ColoradoSearch
-
officials (who often claim that their actions have an administrative finality beyond the reach of courts, see Ludecke v. WatkinsSearch
-
U. S. 345 ) have no authority to detain suspects for secret interrogation. See United States v. MinkerSearch
-
and this Court ruled in Weeks v. UnitedSearch
-
to his arrest. This power is of the sort recognized by Harris v. UnitedSearch
-
even where the arresting officers, as here, had ample time and opportunity to secure a search warrant. United States v. RabinowitzSearch
-
U. S. 56 , overruling Trupiano v. UnitedSearch
-
any such power to make a search generally through premises attendant upon an arrest. See Go-Bart Importing Co. v. PageSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial