Riley v. California
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Riley_v._California an entity of type: Thing
萊利訴加利福尼亞州案（Riley v. California；573 U.S. 373 (2014)；萊利訴加州案），是美國最高法院的一件具有里程碑意義的判例。美國最高法院一致裁定，逮捕期間無法令的手機的數據內容是違憲的。 此案源於州及聯邦法院在手機（SITA）方面的看法分歧。 第四、第五及第七巡迴法院裁定，警官可以按照各種標準附帶搜查逮捕事件中的手機。、，以及加利福尼亞州的最高法院亦遵循了這一裁定。而其他法院如第一巡迴法院，以及與的最高法院均不同意此類裁定。
rdf:langString
Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Riley v. California
rdf:langString
萊利訴加利福尼亞州案
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
David Leon Riley, Petitioner v. California;
rdf:langString
United States, Petitioner v. Brima Wurie
xsd:integer
42702087
xsd:integer
1122059244
xsd:integer
13
rdf:langString
Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
<second>
172800.0
<second>
25920.0
xsd:integer
373
xsd:integer
573
xsd:gMonthDay
--04-29
xsd:integer
2014
rdf:langString
Riley v. California,
xsd:gMonthDay
--06-25
xsd:integer
2014
rdf:langString
David Leon Riley, Petitioner v. California;
rdf:langString
United States, Petitioner v. Brima Wurie
rdf:langString
Police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested.
rdf:langString
Riley v. California
rdf:langString
U.S. v. Wurie
rdf:langString
Roberts
rdf:langString
Supreme Court
rdf:langString
Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. The case arose from inconsistent rulings on cell phone searches from various state and federal courts. The Fourth, Fifth, and Seventh Circuits had ruled that police officers can search cell phones incident to arrest under various standards. That rule was also accepted by the Supreme Courts of Georgia, Massachusetts, and California. On the other hand, the First Circuit and the Supreme Courts of Florida and Ohio disagreed and ruled that police needed a warrant to search the information on a suspect's phone. California had also proposed a state statute requiring police to obtain a warrant before searching the contents of "portable electronic devices".
rdf:langString
萊利訴加利福尼亞州案（Riley v. California；573 U.S. 373 (2014)；萊利訴加州案），是美國最高法院的一件具有里程碑意義的判例。美國最高法院一致裁定，逮捕期間無法令的手機的數據內容是違憲的。 此案源於州及聯邦法院在手機（SITA）方面的看法分歧。 第四、第五及第七巡迴法院裁定，警官可以按照各種標準附帶搜查逮捕事件中的手機。、，以及加利福尼亞州的最高法院亦遵循了這一裁定。而其他法院如第一巡迴法院，以及與的最高法院均不同意此類裁定。
rdf:langString
Alito
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
19462