Legal Opinion

People v. Banks

California Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1993No. S030479PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GEORGE, J.

In this case we decide whether advance publicity is a prerequisite to the operation of a constitutionally permissible highway “sobriety checkpoint.”

In Ingersoll v. Palmer (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1321 [241 Cal.Rptr. 42, 743 P.2d 1299] (hereafter Ingersoll), this court upheld the constitutionality of sobriety checkpoints conducted pursuant to various safeguards, observing, in the course of our analysis, that advance publicity is one such safeguard “important to the maintenance of a constitutionally permissible sobriety checkpoint.” (Id. at p. 1346.) In the present case, the Court of…

2Cases cited70 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. Brown v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. People v. BradfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  2. People v. AlvarezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  3. People v. Bryant, Smith and WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2014
  4. People v. ReyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Santa Clara County Local Transportation Authority v. GuardinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API