Most Officers Get Protective Sweeps Wrong | Case Law Breakdown (Maryland v. Buie) Ep.5
カートのアイテムが多すぎます
カートに追加できませんでした。
ウィッシュリストに追加できませんでした。
ほしい物リストの削除に失敗しました。
ポッドキャストのフォローに失敗しました
ポッドキャストのフォロー解除に失敗しました
Most Officers Get Protective Sweeps Wrong | Case Law Breakdown (Maryland v. Buie) Ep.5
-
ナレーター：
-
著者：
概要
Protective sweeps explained. When can police search your house without a search warrant?
In this episode of Cuffs & Case Law, we break down Maryland v. Buie, the Supreme Court case that defines when officers can conduct a protective sweep during an in-home arrest—and what level of suspicion is required under the Fourth Amendment.
🔍 What You’ll Learn:
What a protective sweep is (and what it is NOT)
The two-part rule from Maryland v. Buie
Arrest warrant vs. search warrant
When officers can search based on reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS)
Why this is about officer safety—not evidence collection
⚖️ The Rule (Quick Breakdown):
Automatic: Check areas immediately adjoining the arrest
Extended: Requires specific, articulable facts (RAS)
Limit: Only places where a person could be
📖 Case Snapshot:
Police executed an arrest warrant, not a search warrant.
After the suspect emerged from a basement, officers conducted a quick sweep and found a red tracksuit in plain view—key evidence in an armed robbery case.
🔗 Read the Case:
Maryland v. Buie: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/494/325/
Terry v. Ohio: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/1/
Michigan v. Long: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/463/1032/
📌 Hashtags:
#ProtectiveSweep #MarylandvBuie #FourthAmendment #SearchAndSeizure #CaseLaw #PoliceTraining #OfficerSafety