回複:thank you for your reply!

來源: apt 2006-02-02 20:07:15 [] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 本文已被閱讀: 次 (560 bytes)
回答: My 2 centsapt2006-02-02 15:19:51
You are absolutely right on that reasonable is very subjective. But, the subjectiveness is not on the police officer. He will be judged by a third person, either a jury or a judge (in a bench trial). In that sense reasonable is based entirely on objective standard, not the police officer, but a prudent third person. This is true for all the substantive laws. A good lawyer might argue that a police officer searching a backseat with a gun on it is reasonable, but his searching of something inside the glove box is totally unreasonable, in this context.
請您先登陸,再發跟帖!

發現Adblock插件

如要繼續瀏覽
請支持本站 請務必在本站關閉/移除任何Adblock

關閉Adblock後 請點擊

請參考如何關閉Adblock/Adblock plus

安裝Adblock plus用戶請點擊瀏覽器圖標
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安裝Adblock用戶請點擊圖標
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”