Recognized Case Laws

Recognized United States Supreme Court Case Laws: Although the State of San Andreas is roleplayed as a state in relation to the United States, we recognize certain amendments instead of recognizing all case law and creating a very complicated legal battlefield, we instead will recognize specific effects of case laws as explicitly stated below.

United States v. Martinez

Inland Border Patrol and Immigration Enforcement checkpoints are permitted on public roads.

Terry v. Ohio

Permits detention and frisk search for weapons (Terry Search) under reasonable suspicion of the commission of a crime.

Pennsylvania v. Mimms

Police officers may order any and all occupants of a vehicle to exit during a traffic stop. Police officers may conduct a pat down.

Miranda v. Arizona

Suspect must be informed of their rights prior to questioning in an incriminatory fashion, otherwise testimony or confession extracted through questioning may be determined as inadmissible in trial. The suspect has the right to remain silent and not answer any incriminating questions without an attorney present; if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided to them for free.

Gant v. Arizona

Police may search the vehicle if a recent occupant was arrested only if it is reasonable to believe that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of the arrest.

New York v. Belton

When a police officer has made a lawful arrest of an occupant of a vehicle, the officer may search the passenger compartment of that automobile (in effect, searches incident to arrest). Police officers may conduct a search of a vehicle upon the sensory (sight or smell) detection of illegal substances such as the emission of the odor of marijuana from a vehicle.

Carroll v. United States

A search of a vehicle is permitted if reasonable belief exists that evidence is present in the vehicle.

Chimel v. California

The arrest of a person in his home does not allow the warrantless search of the whole house incident to arrest.

Graham v. Connor

Excessive use of force claims must be evaluated under the "objectively reasonable" standard. Objectively reasonable force is force that appears to be necessary given the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of the event. This standard requires courts to consider the facts and circumstances surrounding an officer's use of force.

Brendlin v. California

Passengers in a vehicle are considered detained during a traffic stop, allowing officers to treat them as part of the investigation.

Rodriguez v. United States

Police cannot prolong a traffic stop beyond the time needed to address the initial reason for the stop without reasonable suspicion of additional criminal activity.

Florida v. Royer

Detaining someone in a way that restricts their movement without probable cause or extending a stop longer than necessary violates the Fourth Amendment.

Heien v. North Carolina

A traffic stop based on a police officer's reasonable mistake of law can still be valid if the mistake was reasonable.

United States v. Drayton

Officers do not need to inform individuals of their right to refuse a search during consensual encounters unless coercion is evident.