<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Stop-and-Frisk:  Policy searches</title>
	<atom:link href="http://briefcase8.com/2007/03/28/stop-and-frisk-policy-searches/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://briefcase8.com/2007/03/28/stop-and-frisk-policy-searches/</link>
	<description>Case analysis with an attitude</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 14:51:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Briefcase &#187; The elusive search for the bright line</title>
		<link>http://briefcase8.com/2007/03/28/stop-and-frisk-policy-searches/comment-page-1/#comment-41792</link>
		<dc:creator>The Briefcase &#187; The elusive search for the bright line</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://briefcase8.com/2007/03/28/stop-and-frisk-policy-searches/#comment-41792</guid>
		<description>[...] On the other side of bright-line rules, you have the 2nd District&#8217;s decision last week in State v. Schneider.  Yes, the search was struck down, on the ground that the officers had no basis for a stop.  But the court reaffirms its holding that, in cases involving drug trafficking, &#8220;the right to frisk is virtually automatic when individuals are suspected of committing a crime, like drug trafficking, for which they are likely to be armed.&#8221;  As I&#8217;ve mentioned in the past, that&#8217;s not the law in the 8th, despite the above quote being from an Ohio Supreme Court case.  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] On the other side of bright-line rules, you have the 2nd District&#8217;s decision last week in State v. Schneider.  Yes, the search was struck down, on the ground that the officers had no basis for a stop.  But the court reaffirms its holding that, in cases involving drug trafficking, &#8220;the right to frisk is virtually automatic when individuals are suspected of committing a crime, like drug trafficking, for which they are likely to be armed.&#8221;  As I&#8217;ve mentioned in the past, that&#8217;s not the law in the 8th, despite the above quote being from an Ohio Supreme Court case.  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

