Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Oral Argument US v. Antoine Jones

Oral Argument US v. Antoine Jones

Ratings: (0)|Views: 425|Likes:
Published by Michael Pancier
Oral Argument before SCOTUS on whether there is a 4th Amendment Violation for the Govt. to install a GPS tracking unit on your car without a warrant
Oral Argument before SCOTUS on whether there is a 4th Amendment Violation for the Govt. to install a GPS tracking unit on your car without a warrant

More info:

Published by: Michael Pancier on Nov 14, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/14/2011

pdf

text

original

 
 
123456789101112131415161718192021222324251
Official - Subject to Final Review
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - xUNITED STATES, :Petitioner :v. : No. 10-1259ANTOINE JONES :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - xWashington, D.C.Tuesday, November 8, 2011The above-entitled matter came on for oralargument before the Supreme Court of the United Statesat 10:07 a.m.APPEARANCES:MICHAEL R. DREEBEN, ESQ., Deputy Solicitor General,Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; onbehalf of Petitioner.STEPHEN C. LECKAR, ESQ., Washington, D.C.; on behalf ofRespondent.
Alderson Reporting Company
 
 
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252
Official - Subject to Final Review
C O N T E N T SORAL ARGUMENT OF PAGEMICHAEL R. DREEBEN, ESQ.On behalf of the Petitioner 3ORAL ARGUMENT OFSTEPHEN C. LECKAR, ESQ.On behalf of the Respondent 27REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OFMICHAEL R. DREEBEN, ESQ.On behalf of the Petitioner 56
Alderson Reporting Company
 
123456789101112131415161718192021222324253
Official - Subject to Final Review
P R O C E E D I N G S(10:07 a.m.)CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: We'll hear argumentfirst this morning in Case 10-1259, United States v.Jones.Mr. Dreeben.ORAL ARGUMENT OF MICHAEL R. DREEBENON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERMR. DREEBEN: Mr. Chief Justice, and may itplease the Court:Since this Court's decision in Katz v.United States, the Court has recognized a basicdichotomy under the Fourth Amendment. What a personseeks to preserve as private in the enclave of his ownhome or in a private letter or inside of his vehiclewhen he is traveling is a subject of Fourth Amendmentprotection. But what he reveals to the world, such ashis movements in a car on a public roadway, is not.In Knotts v. United States, this Courtapplied that principle to hold that visual and beepersurveillance of a vehicle traveling on the publicroadways infringed no Fourth Amendment expectation ofprivacy.CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Knotts, though,seems to me much more like traditional surveillance.
Alderson Reporting Company

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->