Yahoo Web Search

  1. Sort by

  1. ...a means of advancing that interest. In a later case, Indianapolis v. Edmond, the Supreme Court held that "narcotics ...

    9 Answers · Politics & Government · 13/12/2013

  2. False. Roadblocks can be used to seek specific information, not just general alw enforcement like in City of Indianapolis v. Edmond,

    1 Answers · Politics & Government · 21/10/2011

  3. .... 1975) A temporary checkpoint is a different thing. In Indianapolis v.Edmond, 512 U.S. 32, the Supreme Court held that the...

    8 Answers · Politics & Government · 24/08/2007

  4. ... a drug dog around a car at a narcotics checkpoint was not legal. Indianapolis v. Edmond If the person with the child, was stopped at a DL checkpoint...

    1 Answers · Politics & Government · 25/04/2012

  5. ... the Supreme Court determined in City of Indianapolis v. Edmond (2000) that roadblocks used to check for narcotics are...

    3 Answers · Politics & Government · 16/06/2014

  6. ...invasion of privacy and hurts the community as well. In City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, the police were using sniffing dogs at roadblocks...

    9 Answers · Politics & Government · 26/10/2012

  7. ... DWI checkpoints Constitutional. City of Indianapolis v. Edmond: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-1030.ZS.html Which ...

    12 Answers · Politics & Government · 14/07/2008

  8. This is just stupid. If the person is in possession of illegal drugs, that affect their status, wouldn't you say? Are we suppose to just assume they are not? If the dog doesn't hit on them, we DO Assume they are not...

    8 Answers · Politics & Government · 18/12/2011

  9. NO, ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION IT IS ILLEGAL. THIS IS NOT NAZI GERMANY.

    15 Answers · Politics & Government · 14/07/2007

  1. Ad
    related to Indianapolis v. Edmond
  1. Try asking your question on Yahoo Answers