翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ United States v. Swartz
・ United States v. Syufy Enterprises
・ United States v. The Amistad
・ United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs
・ United States v. Thomas
・ United States v. Thomas (1962)
・ United States v. Thomas (1997)
・ United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Co.
・ United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Ass'n
・ United States v. United Mine Workers of America
・ United States v. United States District Court
・ United States v. Univis Lens Co.
・ United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co.
・ United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal
・ United States v. Vampire Nation
United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez
・ United States v. Virginia
・ United States v. Vuitch
・ United States v. Wade
・ United States v. Warshak
・ United States v. Washington
・ United States v. Watson
・ United States v. Weitzenhoff
・ United States v. Wheeler
・ United States v. Wheeler (1920)
・ United States v. Wheeler (1978)
・ United States v. White
・ United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe
・ United States v. Williams
・ United States v. Williams (1992)


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

United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez : ウィキペディア英語版
United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez

''United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez'', 494 U.S. 259 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined that Fourth Amendment protections do not apply to searches and seizures by United States agents of property owned by a nonresident alien in a foreign country.
==Facts==
Rene Martin Verdugo-Urquidez, a Mexican citizen reputed to be a drug-lord involved in the torture and murder of DEA agent Enrique Camarena Salazar, was arrested and brought to the United States. The DEA decided that it would be a good idea to search the defendant's home, so agents received authorization from the Mexican government to conduct the search. The agents found documents believed to be the defendant's records of his marijuana shipments.
When the government sought to introduce the documents as evidence in court, the defendant objected, asserting that they were obtained without a warrant, and therefore could not constitutionally be used at trial. The United States District Court agreed, and invoked the exclusionary rule to suppress the documents (i.e. to prevent them from being used as evidence). The government appealed this ruling, which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The government then appealed to the Supreme Court.

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. Verdugo-Urquidez」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.