United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez
E1271105
UNEXPLORED
United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that certain constitutional protections, including the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, do not apply to the search and seizure of property owned by a nonresident alien conducted outside the United States.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T17479760 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez Context triple: [United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court, significantCase, United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez]
-
A.
United States v. Munoz-Flores
United States v. Munoz-Flores is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether a federal statute imposing monetary assessments on convicted offenders violated the Constitution’s Origination Clause.
-
B.
United States v. Chavez
United States v. Chavez is a U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the interpretation and procedural requirements of federal wiretap statutes in criminal investigations.
-
C.
United States v. Ramirez-Lopez
United States v. Ramirez-Lopez is a federal appellate criminal case known for Judge Alex Kozinski’s opinion addressing evidentiary and procedural issues in illegal reentry prosecutions.
-
D.
United States v. Wurie
United States v. Wurie is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that, alongside Riley v. California, held that police generally must obtain a warrant before searching digital information on a cell phone seized during an arrest.
-
E.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez Target entity description: United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that certain constitutional protections, including the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, do not apply to the search and seizure of property owned by a nonresident alien conducted outside the United States.
-
A.
United States v. Munoz-Flores
United States v. Munoz-Flores is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed whether a federal statute imposing monetary assessments on convicted offenders violated the Constitution’s Origination Clause.
-
B.
United States v. Chavez
United States v. Chavez is a U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the interpretation and procedural requirements of federal wiretap statutes in criminal investigations.
-
C.
United States v. Ramirez-Lopez
United States v. Ramirez-Lopez is a federal appellate criminal case known for Judge Alex Kozinski’s opinion addressing evidentiary and procedural issues in illegal reentry prosecutions.
-
D.
United States v. Wurie
United States v. Wurie is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that, alongside Riley v. California, held that police generally must obtain a warrant before searching digital information on a cell phone seized during an arrest.
-
E.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
- F. None of above. chosen
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.