Показать сообщение отдельно
post #34 Старый 23.05.2010, 16:05
По умолчанию
The Court of Appeals also determined that the officers violated Mena's Fourth Amendment rights by questioning her about her immigration status during the detention. 332 F.3d, at 1264-1266. This holding, it appears, was premised on the assumption that the officers were required to have independent reasonable suspicion in order to question Mena concerning her immigration status because the questioning 101*101 constituted a discrete Fourth Amendment event. But the premise is faulty. We have "held repeatedly that mere police questioning does not constitute a seizure." Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 434 (1991); see also INS v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210, 212 (1984). "[E]ven when officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may generally ask questions of that individual; ask to examine the individual's identification;
Аватар для Светлана Гэмм
Светлана Гэмм
Senior Member
Регистрация: 28.08.2008
Сообщений: 2,153
Светлана Гэмм вне форума
Ответить с цитированием