§
IN THE MATTER OF AU

16 Cited authorities

  1. Terry v. Ohio

    392 U.S. 1 (1968)   Cited 38,911 times   73 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a police officer who has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity may conduct a brief investigative stop

  2. Katz v. United States

    389 U.S. 347 (1967)   Cited 12,686 times   74 Legal Analyses
    Holding that failure to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in a telephone booth would "ignore the vital role that the public telephone has come to play in private communication"

  3. Mapp v. Ohio

    367 U.S. 643 (1961)   Cited 8,461 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the exclusionary rule under the Fourth Amendment applies to the States, and overruling the contrary rule of Wolf v. Colorado , 338 U.S. 25, 69 S.Ct. 1359, 93 L.Ed. 1782, after considering and rejecting "the current validity of the factual grounds upon which Wolf was based"

  4. Abel v. United States

    362 U.S. 217 (1960)   Cited 1,226 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an individual has no privacy interest in abandoned property, such as items thrown away in a vacated hotel-room wastebasket

  5. Wolf v. Colorado

    338 U.S. 25 (1949)   Cited 1,178 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that exclusionary rule did not apply to the states

  6. People v. Peters

    18 N.Y.2d 238 (N.Y. 1966)   Cited 68 times

    Argued May 5, 1966 Decided July 7, 1966 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, ROBERT J. TRAINOR, J. Robert S. Friedman for appellant. Leonard Rubenfeld, District Attorney ( James J. Duggan of counsel), for respondent. Lewis A. Stern and Alan H. Levine for New York Civil Liberties Union, amicus curiae. KEATING, J. Samuel Lasky was for 18 years a patrolman in the New York City Police Department and for 12 years resided on the sixth and top floor

  7. Au Yi Lau v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Service

    445 F.2d 217 (D.C. Cir. 1971)   Cited 52 times
    Recognizing that one accosted in apparent attempt to avoid being questioned was not clearly detained against his will when he thereafter readily acquiesced in the investigator's interrogation

  8. Green v. United States

    259 F.2d 180 (D.C. Cir. 1958)   Cited 43 times

    No. 14378. Argued June 24, 1958. Decided July 31, 1958. Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied September 12, 1958. Mrs. Jean F. Dwyer, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Mr. Nathan J. Paulson, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U.S. Atty., Carl W. Belcher and Victor W. Caputy, Asst. U.S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee. Before BAZELON, Circuit Judge, and HASTIE, Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and DANAHER, Circuit Judge. Sitting by designation

  9. Ah Chiu Pang v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

    368 F.2d 637 (3d Cir. 1966)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that once the government proves alienage, "the burden shift to the [alien] to justify his presence in the United States"

  10. Gomez v. Layton

    394 F.2d 764 (D.C. Cir. 1968)   Cited 16 times

    No. 21653. Argued April 4, 1968. Decided April 10, 1968. Mr. James B. Blinkoff, Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. Stephen P. Goldman and Ralph J. Temple, Washington, D.C., were on the motion, for appellant. Mr. John R. Hess, Asst. Corporation Counsel for the District of Columbia, with whom Messrs. Charles T. Duncan, Corporation Counsel, Hubert B. Pair, Principal Asst. Corporation Counsel, and Richard W. Barton, Asst. Corporation Counsel, were on the opposition, for appellees. Before BAZELON, Chief

  11. Section 1251 - Transferred

    8 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 2,159 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Delineating crimes that make alien deportable

  12. Section 1357 - Powers of immigration officers and employees

    8 U.S.C. § 1357   Cited 669 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Granting immigration enforcement authority to state or local government officials in a formal agreement with a state or local government.

  13. Section 1354 - Applicability to members of the Armed Forces

    8 U.S.C. § 1354   Cited 7 times

    (a) Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed so as to limit, restrict, deny, or affect the coming into or departure from the United States of an alien member of the Armed Forces of the United States who is in the uniform of, or who bears documents identifying him as a member of, such Armed Forces, and who is coming to or departing from the United States under official orders or permit of such Armed Forces: Provided, That nothing contained in this section shall be construed to give