State v. Brown
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentTom Glaze, Justice
Today, a 4-3 divided court issues an opinion that makes a radical change in Arkansas search and seizure law. The decision is clearly contrary to prior law and the change is totally unwarranted and unnecessary. Initially, I point out the obvious mistakes the four-member court has made in its refusal to follow the Fourth Amendment, as it protects all citizens against unlawful searches.
First, the majority’s members seem to treat the so-called “knock and talk” as a brand new procedure used by law enforcement officers. Such a procedure has been around for a long time, and merely allows officers to…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. WatsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Robert O. Gilmore, Jr., and Inmates of San Quentin State Prison, United States of America, Intervenor v. People of the State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Ronald Tobin, Clifford Roger Ackerson, United States of America v. Ronald TobinCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
- United States v. Lenin M. Jerez and Carlos M. SolisCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.