翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ United States v. Crimmins ・ United States v. Cruikshank ・ United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. ・ United States v. Darby Lumber Co. ・ United States v. Davila ・ United States v. Davis ・ United States v. Davis (1962) ・ United States v. Davis (2014) ・ United States v. Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co. ・ United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. ・ United States v. Dinitz ・ United States v. Dion ・ United States v. Dominguez Benitez ・ United States v. Dotterweich ・ United States v. Dougherty ・ United States v. Drayton ・ United States v. Drescher ・ United States v. Drew ・ United States v. DuBay ・ United States v. Dunn ・ United States v. E. C. Knight Co. ・ United States v. Eichman ・ United States v. Elcom Ltd. ・ United States v. Emerson ・ United States v. Enmons ・ United States v. Extreme Associates, Inc. ・ United States v. Felix ・ United States v. Fenwick ・ United States v. Feola ・ United States v. Flores-Montano Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク United States v. Drayton ： ウィキペディア英語版 United States v. Drayton ''United States v. Drayton'', , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court clarified the applicability of Fourth Amendment protections to searches and seizures that occur on buses, as well as the function of consent during searches by law enforcement.〔Matthew Phillips, ''Effective Warnings Before Consent Searches: Practical, Necessary, and Desirable'', 45 1185, 1190–91 (2008).〕 During a scheduled stop in Tallahassee, Florida, police officers boarded a Greyhound bus as part of a drug interdiction effort and interviewed passengers.〔''United States v. Drayton'', .〕 After talking to two of the passengers and asking if they could "check () person," officers discovered the two passengers had taped several packages of cocaine to their legs.〔''Drayton'', 536 U.S. at 199.〕 At trial, the passengers argued that officers violated their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures because the police engaged in coercive behavior and never informed them that their participation in the drug interdiction efforts was voluntary.〔 Writing for a majority of the Court, Justice Anthony Kennedy held officers need not personally advise passengers of their right to refuse consent to a search on a bus.〔''Drayton'', 536 U.S. at 206–07.〕 Furthermore, Justice Kennedy ruled that the search was not unreasonable because passengers were free to leave the bus and the individuals who were searched provided voluntary consent.〔''Drayton'', 536 U.S. at 204–07.〕 Although some commentators have praised the Court's ruling for encouraging citizens "to stand up for their rights,"〔(''The Fourth Amendment and Antidilution: Confronting the Overlooked Function of the Consent Search Doctrine'' ), 119 2187, 2203 (2006)〕 other scholars have criticized the Court's ruling for failing to reflect the realities of "real-life confrontations occurring on the street."〔Ric Simmons, (''Not "Voluntary" but Still Reasonable: A New Paradigm for Understanding the Consent Searches Doctrine'' ), 80 773, 773 (2005).〕 ==Background== 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「United States v. Drayton」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.