United States v. Walter George Strickland, Jr.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an officer's search of a spare-tire compartment was within the scope of the defendant's consent to a search of his \entire vehicle\
• holding that general consent to search defendant's car did not extend to slashing open the spare tire
• holding that slashing open a spare tire found inside the trunk of the defendant’s vehicle exceeded the reasonable scope of consent
• holding that consent to search a vehicle did not include consent to slash a spare tire and look inside
• holding that consent to search a vehicle did not include consent to slash a spare tire and look inside
• holding that officer’s testimony that he stopped every car he observed that was doing what defendant’s car was doing was sufficient to support the district court’s finding that the stop was not pretextual

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).