|
''City of Indianapolis v. Edmond'', 531 U.S. 32 (2000), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States limited the power of law enforcement to conduct suspicionless searches, specifically, using drug-sniffing dogs at roadblocks. Previous Supreme Court decisions had given the police power to create roadblocks for the purposes of border security (''United States v. Martinez-Fuerte''), and removing drunk drivers from the road (''Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz''). This decision stated that the power was limited to situations in which the search was "designed to serve special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement." The Court drew a line on check point programs that followed ''Police v. Sitz'' (1990) "whose primary purpose" is "to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing". The Court refused to "credit the 'general interest in crime control' as justification for a regime of suspicionless stops." The opinion was delivered by Justice O'Connor, joined by Justices Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer. Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined, and Justice Scalia joined as to part I. Justice Thomas also filed a separate dissent. ==See also== * List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 531 * List of United States Supreme Court cases * United States v. Martinez-Fuerte * Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz * Illinois v. Lidster 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「City of Indianapolis v. Edmond」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|