In certain types of checkpoints and roadblocks,no individualized suspicion for any driver or vehicle is required.However,the U.S.Supreme Court's decision in Indianapolis v.Edmond held unconstitutional the use of a roadblock to detect criminal wrongdoing.Explain this case as an exception to the general rule on roadblocks.Do these roadblock cases allowing suspicionless intrusions establish dangerous precedents which will greatly weaken Fourth Amendment protections? Explain your position and provide examples.
Correct Answer:
Verified
View Answer
Unlock this answer now
Get Access to more Verified Answers free of charge
Q107: In United States v.Arvizu (534 U.S.266 [2001]),the
Q108: The U.S.Supreme Court has held that although
Q109: Inventory searches of vehicles are valid,but must
Q110: In Robbins v.California (1981),the U.S.Supreme Court stated
Q111: Warrantless searches of motor vehicles after a
Q113: In Illinois v.Lidster (2004),the U.S.Supreme Court stated
Q114: In Carroll v.United States (1925),the U.S.Supreme Court
Q115: The authority of the police to search
Q116: What are the five considerations justifying the
Q117: An officer can legally do many things
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents