|
gptkbp:instanceOf
|
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court_case
|
|
gptkbp:arguedDate
|
1966-04-26
1966-04-25
|
|
gptkbp:citation
|
gptkb:384_U.S._757
|
|
gptkbp:country
|
gptkb:United_States
|
|
gptkbp:date
|
1966-06-20
|
|
gptkbp:decidedBy
|
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court
|
|
gptkbp:defendant
|
gptkb:State_of_California
|
|
gptkbp:dissentingOpinionBy
|
gptkb:William_O._Douglas
gptkb:Potter_Stewart
gptkb:John_Marshall_Harlan_II
|
|
gptkbp:docketNumber
|
415
|
|
gptkbp:fullName
|
gptkb:Armando_Schmerber_v._State_of_California
|
|
gptkbp:heldBy
|
Warrantless blood test in a DUI case does not violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
Warrantless blood test may be permissible under the Fourth Amendment if exigent circumstances exist.
|
|
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label
|
Schmerber v. California
|
|
gptkbp:legalSubject
|
gptkb:Fifth_Amendment
gptkb:Fourth_Amendment
|
|
gptkbp:majorityOpinionBy
|
gptkb:Hugo_Black
gptkb:Byron_White
gptkb:Tom_C._Clark
gptkb:Abe_Fortas
gptkb:Earl_Warren
gptkb:William_J._Brennan,_Jr.
|
|
gptkbp:plaintiff
|
gptkb:Armando_Schmerber
|
|
gptkbp:predecessor
|
gptkb:Birchfield_v._North_Dakota
gptkb:Missouri_v._McNeely
|
|
gptkbp:relatedTo
|
self-incrimination
search and seizure
DUI law
|
|
gptkbp:bfsParent
|
gptkb:Maryland_v._King
|
|
gptkbp:bfsLayer
|
6
|