New York Immigration Lawyers

Home ›› Court Opinions Topics & Themes   Asset Forfeitures   Conspiracy   Drug Policy Opinion   Drugs: Types, Dosages, Effects   First Amendment   Justiciability   Medicinal Marijuana   Policy Considerations   Proportionality   Reasonable Expectation of Privacy   Searches and Seizures      Airports      Borders      Consent      Drug Testing      Dwellings      Exclusionary Rule      Grounds for a Search      Informants      Mail      Nuances of Detention      Personal Items      Private Action      Roads and Vehicles      Tools and Augmentation      Warrants   Sentencing and Penalties Authors Trivia

Court Opinions ›› United States v. Arvizu (2002) UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. RALPH ARVIZU No. 00-1519 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 534 U.S. 266; 122 S. Ct. 744; 151 L. Ed. 2d 740; 2002 U.S. LEXIS 490; 70 U.S.L.W. 4076; 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Service 380; 2002 Daily Journal DAR 499; 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 81 November 27, 2001, Argued January 15, 2002, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Respondent was stopped by Border Patrol Agent Stoddard while driving on an unpaved road in a remote area of southeastern Arizona. A search of his vehicle revealed more than 100 pounds of marijuana, and he was charged with possession with intent to distribute. The Federal District Court denied respondent's motion to suppress, citing a number of facts that gave Stoddard reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle. The Ninth Circuit reversed. In its view, fact-specific weighing of circumstances or other multifactor tests introduced uncertainty and unpredictability into the Fourth Amendment analysis, making it necessary to clearly delimit the factors that an officer may consider in making stops such as this one. It then held that several factors relied upon by the District Court carried little or no weight in the reasonable-suspicion calculus and that the remaining factors were not enough to render the stop permissible. Held: Considering the totality of the circumstances and giving due weight to the factual inferences drawn by Stoddard and the District Court Judge, Stoddard had reasonable suspicion to believe that respondent was engaged in illegal activity. Opinion by: REHNQUIST When discussing how reviewing courts should make reasonable-suspicion determinations, we have said repeatedly that they must look at the "totality of the circumstances" of each case to see whether the detaining officer has a "particularized and objective basis" for suspecting legal wrongdoing. [...] A determination that reasonable suspicion exists, however, need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct. [...]

Drug Info - list of authority sites on various drugs. StopTheDrugWar.org Media Awareness Project Drug War Facts - just what the website name says. Very informative. Funny Pics © 2007 Yakov Spektor Privacy Policy