what are the conditions of a 4 way search clause in california?
341838
'Any person convicted of ANY drug or other serious offenses who is put on probation, loses the legal right to refuse unreasonable, unwarranted, police searches. Judges routinely impose upon defendants convicted by guilty plea of drug or other crimes involving possession of illicit or stolen things, the condition that they voluntarily submit to a police search, without a warrant, any time of the day or night, in their homes, cars, or of their person, without probable cause. In Alameda County, California, this probation condition is known as a "four-way search clause" (search of person, home, car, or possessions).'\n\nsource: http://www.correspondences.org/archives/000411.html
1132966
Rosenose is correct, but a little vague. Following is a link to information from the California Secretary of State that has all the informaiton you need: \n\nhttp://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_cand.htm
923306
FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'\nprobably not. it all depends on the skill of the prosecutor, and the strength of their evidence. if it's a constitutional issue (which 4th amendment is) you'll need to hire a separate constitutional lawyer (believe it or not, hillary clinton is one of the best!) to address the constitutionality of the point in case. any more ?'s, just ask. "i ain't passed the bar but i know a little bit.....enough that you won't illegally search my shit."  - jay z
898793
It is not a in the state's jurisdiction.  Federal court is the only option unless your state has similar provisions.
49761
Hard to say without knowing what context you've heard/seen it in.\n\nIn California, defendants who are charged with felonies are given a preliminary hearing before a judge to determine if there's sufficient information to indicate the defendant did what the government is alleging.  If there is, the defendant is "bound over" for trial in superior court.  Maybe this is a similar thing, but you really need to provide some additional details to get a solid answer.
794256
try www.findlaw.com     \nzabasearch\ngood luck!
235686
Go to the following site and use the search button in the top right corner. \n\nhttp://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/index.html
858080
The California Secretary of State website has a Business Search portal where you can search whether a business has registered in the state of California. \n\nThis is the site you need: \nhttp://kepler.ss.ca.gov/list.html
27249
Go here: \nhttp://www.cslb.ca.gov/consumers/default.asp\nYou can look them up by license number, business name, or personal name. That link goes to the page where you can choose the type of search you want, and has other related links like where to file complaints.
148697
Different laws for different states.
518267
yes you have the right, and he has the right to secure a warrant if he has probable cause ( assuming he make a good arguemetive case or a superior does in front of a judge ) andthen only the with a warrant in hand search your car, he can also detain you ( you are not under arrest ) until the warrant arrives. And if after the search he finds nohing but has the warrant you can sue him, ( or the police department ) for illegl search if you can prove that the search, was suspect due to a lack of probable cause ( even if the officer thinks he has it ). the trouble is judges tend to err on the side o the police at times especially if he pulls you over in a high crime / narco trafficing area, he can pretty much argue probable cause basedon those factors alone.
396723
Wow.  So many highly opinionated answers, and so little information upon which to base them.\n\nFirst of all, perhaps it's just the way you wrote your question, but since you work on a different floor, how do *you* know ANY of this is true?\n\nSecond, what state/country are you in?  It might very well matter.\n\nA few other questions, if you're going to stand a chance of getting an intelligent answer that doesn't involve someone talking about the Patriot Act:\n\nYou said the Director of Nursing called the police.  Did they come?  What did they do?\n\nWho told the people on that floor they could not leave?  How was that enforced, if it was?\n\nWho ordered the strip search, and what do you mean by strip search?  It has a specific legal definition and you may not be talking about what's considered a strip search under the law.  Were people actually required to remove or arrange some or all of their clothing so as to permit a visual inspection of the underclothing, breasts, buttocks, or genitalia? (California's definition of a strip search)\n\nI'll talk about what I can talk about based on California law:\n\nAs for your question (can you be legally strip searched at your place of employment without a warrant?); it's almost not possible to answer you.  Strip searches in California do not require a warrant, but they are subject to a number of requirements, chief among them being that you are in custody.  I cannot imagine a situation where an entire floor of nurses (whether that be five or fifty) could have been arrested for this and therefore strip searched.\n\nI don't know...I could probably go on, but I think there's just not enough information to give you a decent answer.  Strip searching, detaining employees, urine testing and the like might not have been out of line depending on agreements with your employer and who conducted them (I can't imagine the police in the US would have done such a thing without an awful lot more info than this) and whether in fact they were even done (you did say you work on another floor, so I have to assume you got this info second hand and perhaps a little exaggerated).\n\nPost some more info, I'd love to know more about this.
1182048
Extradition is discussed in several state laws. You can search here to find what you are looking for: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html
1186725
Chances of anyone being able to give you a good answer for this are slim without knowing what state you've seen this rule of court in (and if you don't believe me, look at the answers you already have).\n\nRules of court vary by state, and you have to provide the state you saw this in to stand any chance of getting a good answer.
648693
It depends on which court handled the case. If it is the U.S. Supreme Court, go to the website; http://www.supremecourtus.gov/ and click on the the docket link and enterin your search criteria. Good luck.
562800
Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure. \nThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. \n\nFifth Amendment – Due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, private property. \nNo person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. \n\nSixth Amendment – Trial by jury and other rights of the accused. \nIn all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.\n\nSeventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury. \nIn suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. \nEighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail, as well as cruel or unusual punishment. \nExcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. \n\nThese are all considered "criminal ammendments".\n\nRegards,\n\nArmus
832516
in general in cal, you can agree to anything, unless the law says ou can't.\nwith such a general question it is dificult to get specific.\nthe bay area counties are among the most restrictive in ca, and rent control is a fact of life, where the rest of the state is more relaxed.\ncontact the local board of realtors for better info.