UNITED STATES
v.
WATSON; AMERICAN FOREIGN STEAMSHIP CO. V. MATISE

U.S. | 1976-03-22
Nos. 74-538; No. 74-966
Mr. Justice Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.
424 U.S. 979 Supreme Court of the United States (1976) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Avery, 531 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
    …urroundings alone, or even the fact that a defendant has been taken into custody, is not sufficient to constitute coercion and vitiate consent. Cf. I.N.S. v. Delgado; United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411, 96 S.Ct. 820, 46 L.Ed.2d 598, reh’g denied, 424 U.S. 979, 96 S.Ct. 1488, 47 L.Ed.2d 750 (1976). In Watson, the defendant had been arrested immediately before consenting to a search of his car. The Supreme Court reversed a decision of the Court of Appeals which had directed that the evidence be suppressed…
  • Duncan v. Storie, 869 F.2d 1100 (8th Cir. 1989)
    …as no expectations of privacy and the arresting officers need only demonstrate that there was probable cause in order to justify a warrantless arrest. United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411, 423-24, 96 S.Ct. 820, 827-28, 46 L.Ed.2d 598, reh’g denied, 424 U.S. 979, 96 S.Ct. 1488, 47 L.Ed.2d 750 (1976). However, a warrantless arrest that occurs inside an individual’s home is unconstitutional unless the officers demonstrate the existence of probable cause and exigent circumstances.3 The doorway of an individua…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw