翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ County of Peebles (ship)
・ County of Pelham
・ County of Plantagenet, Queensland
・ County of Polwarth
・ County of Portugal
・ County of Raetia
・ County of Raglan
・ County of Ravensberg
・ County of Rawbelle
・ County of Razès
・ County of Regenstein
・ County of Ribagorza
・ County of Rieneck
・ County of Rietberg
・ County of Ripon
County of Riverside v. McLaughlin
・ County of Rochedale
・ County of Rodez
・ County of Rodney, Victoria
・ County of Rouen
・ County of Roussillon
・ County of Saarwerden
・ County of Sacramento v. Lewis
・ County of Saint-Pol
・ County of Santa Clara v. California First Amendment Coalition
・ County of Santa Fiora
・ County of Sargans
・ County of Savoy
・ County of Schaumburg
・ County of Sicily


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

County of Riverside v. McLaughlin : ウィキペディア英語版
County of Riverside v. McLaughlin

''County of Riverside v. McLaughin'', , was a United States Supreme Court case which involved the question of whether suspects arrested without a warrant (warrantless arrests) must be brought into court within a reasonable amount of time to determine if there is probable cause for holding the suspect in custody.
==Overview==
The ''County of Riverside v. McLaughlin'' (1991) case was a court case dealing with the interpretation of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution in a probable cause case involving a warrantless arrest. In this instance, the Fourth Amendment is used by the plaintiff(s) to argue that the clause “warrants must be legally justified with probable cause” also applies to ''warrantless'' arrests because it was implied that it would be unreasonable, if not ''unconstitutional'', for someone to be arrested without determining probable cause. This U.S. Supreme Court also used previous precedent derived from previous Supreme Court cases – such as the ''Gerstein v. Pugh'' (1975) case – to arrive at their final decision.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1990/1990_89_1817 )
This lawsuit was filed in 1987 by the plaintiff – Donald Lee McLaughlin – against the County of Riverside (California). He asked the United States District Court (Central District of California) to issue an injunction ordering that the County stop its policies on warrantless arrests, arguing that the practice may be unconstitutional.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/89-1817.ZS.html )〕 Eventually, the County of Riverside appealed the case to the Ninth Court of Appeals after the District Court sided with the plaintiff; the Court of Appeals also agreed with the plaintiff’s arguments. This case then went before the U.S. Supreme Court. In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court justices found that the County of Riverside’s practices in regards to warrantless arrests were unconstitutional and ruled that suspects who are arrested without a warrant must be given probable cause within 48 hours〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/89-1817.ZO.html )

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「County of Riverside v. McLaughlin」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.