-
12 S.W.3d 813 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas March 1, 2000 No. 681-99
Under this balancing test, a search of a house is “generally not reasonable without a warrant issued on probable cause,” but may nevertheless be permitted when a strong public interest exists for the search. Id.
Under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, a search conducted without a warrant issued upon probable cause is “per se unreasonable ... subject only to a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.”
The police officers did not have a search or arrest warrant. 3 . The protective sweep is analogous to a Terry or Long frisk. See generally Michigan v.
-
10 S.W.3d 323 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas January 26, 2000 No. 0614-99
At no time did the police obtain a warrant to search appellant or the car. At both a pretrial suppression hearing and at trial, appellant sought to have the money and cocaine suppressed for lack of probable cause.
However, “[t]he purpose of a limited search after [an] investigatory stop is not to discover evidence of a crime, but to allow the peace officer to pursue investigation without fear of violence.” Wood v.
Consent to search is one of the well-established exceptions to the constitutional requirements of both a warrant and probable cause. Schneckloth v.
-
17 S.W.3d 677 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas May 17, 2000 No. 73131
The motion simply alleged that the search "was conducted without consent, without a valid warrant, without probable cause" in violation of the Fourth Amendment and *683 Article I § 9 of the Texas Constitution. [3] Moreover, appellant
The search warrant was approved by a magistrate in Val Verde County.
With the warrant in hand, on October 11, 1996, at around 11:45 p.m., officers went out to the car. One of the police officers shone a flashlight at and looked through one of the windows of the car.
-
918 S.W.2d 466 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas January 10, 1996 No. 70105
Gomez asked Bennett for permission to search the house, and Bennett replied, “Yes, you need to get in there.” Without securing a warrant, the police did just that.
The police returned the following day to collect more evidence — again, without a warrant.
warrant for the Brimage residence prior to the search of the house by the police.
-
158 S.W.3d 488 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas March 9, 2005 No. PD-1946-03
Ford initially refused Peavy’s request for permission to search his car. Peavy testified that while he was waiting for backup Ford consented to a *491 search.
After another state trooper arrived, Peavy conducted a search of Ford’s car. Peavy’s search produced a bottle containing codeine, and another bottle containing codeine mixed with soda. Ford was then placed under arrest.
this burden by establishing that a search or seizure occurred without a warrant. 6 Once the defendant has made this showing, the burden of proof shifts to the State where it is required to establish that the search or seizure was
-
871 S.W.2d 183 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas October 13, 1993 No. 70999
evidence of analysis of blood taken from him pursuant to a search warrant as the affidavit in the search warrant contains no probable cause to support issuance of the warrant; in admitting evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant
probable cause for the issuance of the search warrant and there was no showing of a good faith exception to the requirement for a validly issued search warrant; and, in overruling his motion for mistrial after the State made a patently
Appellant argues in his fifth point of error that the trial court erred in admitting evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant where there was no probable cause for the issuance of the search warrant.
-
152 S.W.3d 54 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas October 20, 2004 No. 1738-03
Kothe, in conjunction with running a driver’s license and warrant check. The deputy concluded that Mr. Kothe was not intoxicated and returned to his patrol car to wait for the results on the warrant cheek.
Kothe was not intoxicated, any further detention, without articulable suspicion of some other crime, violated the Fourth Amendment. He claims that the later search of Ms.
Kothe’s consent to search his car was not unconstitutionally tainted.
-
154 S.W.3d 604 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas January 26, 2005 No. PD-1629-03
Appellant timely filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence alleging that her rights were violated as a result of an illegal search and seizure without a warrant, probable cause, or other lawful authority pursuant to the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth
a warrant.
Steelman, 1 held that although there were facts that may have been sufficient to establish probable cause necessary for procuring a warrant, in this instance, the facts were not of such a character as to allow a warrantless search
-
521 S.W.3d 1 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas June 7, 2017 No. PD-1391-15
Therefore, before police officers may conduct a search they must obtain a warrant or show that a recognized exception to the warrant requirement applies. Jones v.
expectation of privacy may *13 not be searched, even on probable cause, without a warrant.
Under the T.L.O. test, public school teachers and administrators can search a public school student’s locker, desk, person, backpack, or car without a warrant based upon reasonable suspicion rather than probable cause.
-
68 S.W.3d 644 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas January 30, 2002 No. 73765
She stopped her car, and when the driver of the red car got out of the car, she put the car in reverse and tried to run over him. Robinson then drove back to the Jack-in-the-Box and asked an employee to call the police.
She then began to chase the red car to get a license plate number. The police subsequently joined the chase. During the chase, Officer Larry Byers saw the red car crash and two black males run from the car.
Sergeant Conover then asked appellant if the police could search his apartment. According to the sergeant, appellant said, “Sure, go ahead” and “Yeah, man, you can search.
-
214 S.W.3d 17 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas January 31, 2007 No. PD-748-05
Did the Court of Appeals err in holding that police had no probable cause to search Appellant’s car after Appellant was observed secreting a plastic bag in his car following a traffic accident?
Law and Analysis The Fourth Amendment forbids unreasonable searches and seizures by government officials. 23 Generally, a search conducted without a warrant is considered per se unreasonable. 24 But there is an exception
did so without probable cause.
-
117 S.W.3d 854 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas October 8, 2003 No. 1196-02
, an officer may enter and search a private residence without a warrant for the limited purpose of serving those functions when it is objectively reasonable
unequivocally, without question, entitled to enter the defendant’s trailer in order to conduct a search for the remaining child who they did not have possession of.
The Court noted that “searches of cars that are constantly movable may make the search of a car without a warrant a reasonable one although the result might be the opposite in a search of a home, a store, or other fixed piece of property
-
93 S.W.3d 102 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas October 23, 2002 Nos. 1022-00, 1023-00
There, as here, the police knocked, then entered without permission. There they searched, here they arrested four people and waited hours for a search warrant.
But, while other factors may bear on an officer's ability to arrest or search, probable cause is probable causewhether it be for an arrest, a search, an arrest warrant, or a search warrant.
So, after today, not only are the police forbidden to arrest without a warrant in these circumstances, they are also forbidden to search, and a magistrate may not issue an arrest warrant or a search warrant on the basis of these facts
-
232 S.W.3d 55 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas May 9, 2007 No. PD-1013-06
Ventresca, 11 the Court declared that “in a doubtful or marginal case [of probable cause] a search under warrant may be sustained where one without one would fail.” 12 The Supreme Court has repeatedly reminded reviewing courts that
later attempting to justify their actions by *60 invoking some exception to the warrant requirement. 14 The cornerstone of the Fourth Amendment and its Texas equivalent is that a magistrate shall not issue a search warrant without
as near as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.”). . 769 S.W.2d 887 (Tex.Crim.App.1989). .
-
71 S.W.3d 763 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas April 3, 2002 No. 73490
Hardin did not feel any weapons. 5 Nevertheless, Hardin suspected that appellant may have been involved in the reported gunfire and he escorted appellant to the back seat of his patrol car for questioning.
“The purpose of this limited search is not to discover evidence of crime, but to allow the officer to pursue his investigation without fear of violence.... ” Adams v.
Hardin escorted appellant to his patrol car “to question him further about his being out” and “to investigate if he may have been involved in the shots being fired in the area in some way, shape, or form.”
-
728 S.W.2d 375 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas April 15, 1987 No. 943-85
At no time did the police officers obtain a warrant to arrest the appellant or to search his car. The trial court denied the appellant’s pretrial motion to suppress. The items discovered in the search were admitted in evidence.
Article 15.22, Y.A.C.C.P., states, in pertinent part, that “[a] person is arrested when he has been actually placed under restraint or taken into custody ... by an officer ... arresting without a warrant.”
In upholding the appellant's arrest, the Court of Appeals also relied on Article 14.-03(a)(1), supra, which authorizes police to arrest without a warrant “persons found in suspicious places and under circumstances which reasonably
-
340 S.W.3d 454 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas May 4, 2011 No. PD-0261-10
, the police officer executing a warrant, or the police officer conducting a search or seizure under one of the exceptions to the warrant requirementis not that they always be correct, but that they always be reasonable
If this exception applies, then the police may search `every part of the vehicle and its contents that may conceal the object of the search.' [ United States v.
When these justifications are absent, a search of an arrestee's vehicle will be unreasonable unless police obtain a warrant or show that another exception to the warrant requirement applies.
-
475 S.W.2d 744 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas February 2, 1972 No. 44389
After taking appellant to the police station, the officers obtained a warrant to search the car. The key to the car was taken from appellant in the course of a search of his person conducted at the police station.
The officers obtained a warrant to search the car, but the warrant was later found to be defective. The car was towed to the police station, where it was searched for the first time two days after the arrest.
This is not a case in which the officers, seeing a moving car in which they have probable cause to believe certain articles are contained, stop the car and search. In short, we see no justification for a search without warrant.
-
816 S.W.2d 407 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas September 18, 1991 No. 0795-89
The court concluded that the cocaine was seized in a legal inventory search of appellant's impounded automobiles. [4] Appellant contends that the search and seizure was premised on a warrantless arrest made without probable cause
of arrest, or by an officer or person arresting without a warrant."
State, 631 S.W.2d 159 (Tex.Cr.App.1982) (Defendant was arrested without warrant, when officers grabbed his left arm and "escorted him outside."
-
399 S.W.3d 147 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas April 10, 2013 No. PD-0388-12
In deciding this petition for discretionary review filed by the State, we address what constitutes exigent circumstances permitting police officers to enter a home without a warrant.
In King , the Court held that, when probable cause and exigent circumstances exist, police officers may enter a home without a warrant, even when their conduct created the exigency, as long as the officers did not create the exigency
Nothing in King supports the State’s contention that a police officer who has probable cause to believe that there are illegal narcotics in a home may enter that home without a warrant after he has identified himself as an officer
Showing the top 500 cases. Narrow your search or add filters to see more.