Under the totality of the circumstances, which began when an anonymous 911 caller reported that a vehicle had run her off the road, police officer had reasonable suspicion that the driver was intoxicated so that officer’s traffic stop complied with the Fourth Amendment.
C. Thomas
Alleyne v. United States, No. 11-9335, __ U.S. __ (June 17, 2013).
“[A]ny fact that increases the mandatory minimum [sentence] is an ‘element’ that must be submitted to the jury.”
Missouri v. McNeely, No. 11–1425, __U.S. __ (April 17, 2013).
Rejects argument that “the natural metabolization of alcohol in the bloodstream presents a per se exigency that justifies an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement for nonconsensual blood testing in all drunk-driving cases,” and holds instead “that exigency in this context must be determined case by case based on the totality of the circumstances.”
Williams v. Illinois, No. 10-8505, __ U.S. __ (June 18, 2012).
Plurality opinion on whether Confrontation Clause permits the prosecution to introduce an analyst’s forensic report through an expert witness; plurality holds in this case Clause did not preclude an expert’s testimony that defendant’s DNA profile matched a vaginal swab semen DNA profile produced by a Cellmark analyst who did not testify.
Perry v. New Hampshire, No. 10–8974, 565 U.S. __ (Jan. 11, 2012).
Declines to adopt a due process judicial reliability screening procedure for eyewitness identification evidence.