Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Boston University School of Law (4)
- Selected Works (4)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Florida State University College of Law (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
-
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Duke Law (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- Penn State Law (1)
- SelectedWorks (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (6)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (2)
- Stephen E Henderson (2)
- Touro Law Review (2)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (2)
-
- Akron Law Review (1)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Amanda C Pustilnik (1)
- Emory Law Journal (1)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (1)
- Florida State University Law Review (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Kit Kinports (1)
- Oklahoma Law Review (1)
- Publications (1)
- Rachel A. Harmon (1)
- Scholarly Publications (1)
- St. John's Law Review (1)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (1)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 29 of 29
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Automated Fourth Amendment, Maneka Sinha
The Automated Fourth Amendment, Maneka Sinha
Emory Law Journal
Courts routinely defer to police officer judgments in reasonable suspicion and probable cause determinations. Increasingly, though, police officers outsource these threshold judgments to new forms of technology that purport to predict and detect crime and identify those responsible. These policing technologies automate core police determinations about whether crime is occurring and who is responsible.
Criminal procedure doctrine has failed to insist on some level of scrutiny of—or skepticism about—the reliability of this technology. Through an original study analyzing numerous state and federal court opinions, this Article exposes the implications of law enforcement’s reliance on these practices given the weighty interests …
Facial Recognition And The Fourth Amendment, Andrew Ferguson
Facial Recognition And The Fourth Amendment, Andrew Ferguson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Facial recognition offers a totalizing new surveillance power. Police now have the capability to monitor, track, and identify faces through networked surveillance cameras and datasets of billions of images. Whether identifying a particular suspect from a still photo, or identifying every person who walks past a digital camera, the privacy and security impacts of facial recognition are profound and troubling.
This Article explores the constitutional design problem at the heart of facial recognition surveillance systems. One might hope that the Fourth Amendment – designed to restrain police power and enacted to limit governmental overreach – would have something to say …
Stingray Cell-Site Simulator Surveillance And The Fourth Amendment In The Twenty-First Century: A Review Of The Fourth Amendment In An Age Of Surveillance, And Unwarranted, Harvey Gee
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
This Review discusses two timely and insightful books examining the changing relationship between privacy and the Fourth Amendment in the digital era. Part I discusses the tensions between the need to protect privacy rights and the slowly evolving legal landscape during a time of rapidly changing technology, to introduce David Gray’s The Fourth Amendment in an Age of Surveillance. His book explains how the Fourth Amendment, though embattled, can have a prominent role in twenty-first century discussions of privacy, technology, and surveillance. Gray’s analysis is engaged to broaden the conversation about Stingray technology. This section analyzes a sampling of …
Detention By Any Other Name, Sandra G. Mayson
Detention By Any Other Name, Sandra G. Mayson
All Faculty Scholarship
An unaffordable bail requirement has precisely the same effect as an order of pretrial detention: the accused person is jailed pending trial. It follows as a logical matter that an order requiring an unaffordable bail bond as a condition of release should be subject to the same substantive and procedural protections as an order denying bail altogether. Yet this has not been the practice.
This Article lays out the logical and legal case for the proposition that an order that functionally imposes detention must be treated as an order of detention. It addresses counterarguments and complexities, including both empirical and …
Core Criminal Procedure, Steven Arrigg Koh
Core Criminal Procedure, Steven Arrigg Koh
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional criminal procedural rights are familiar to contemporary criminal law scholars and practitioners alike. But today, U.S. criminal justice may diverge substantially from its centuries-old framework when all three branches recognize only a core set of inviolable rights, implicitly or explicitly discarding others. This criminal procedural line drawing takes place when the U.S. criminal justice system engages in law enforcement cooperation with foreign criminal justice systems in order to advance criminal cases.
This Article describes the two forms of this criminal procedural line drawing. The first is a “core criminal procedure” approach, rooted in fundamental rights, that arises in the …
Cops And Cars: How The Automobile Drove Fourth Amendment Law, Tracey Maclin
Cops And Cars: How The Automobile Drove Fourth Amendment Law, Tracey Maclin
Faculty Scholarship
This is an essay on Professor Sarah A. Seo’s new book, Policing the Open Road: How Cars Transformed American Freedom (Harvard Univ. Press 2019). I focus on Professor Seo’s analysis of Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925) and Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160 (1949). Carroll is important not only because it was the Court’s first car case. Understanding Carroll (and Brinegar, which solidified and expanded Carroll’s holding) is essential because, nearly one hundred years later, its logic continues to direct how the modern Court resolves Fourth Amendment claims of motorists. Put simply, a majority of today’s …
The End Of Intuition-Based High-Crime Areas, Ben Grunwald, Jeffrey Fagan
The End Of Intuition-Based High-Crime Areas, Ben Grunwald, Jeffrey Fagan
Faculty Scholarship
In 2000, the Supreme Court held in Illinois v. Wardlow that a suspect’s presence in a “high-crime area” is relevant in determining whether an officer has reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigative stop. Despite the importance of the decision, the Court provided no guidance about what that standard means, and over fifteen years later, we still have no idea how police officers understand and apply it in practice. This Article conducts the first empirical analysis of Wardlow by examining data on over two million investigative stops conducted by the New York Police Department from 2007 to 2012.
Our results suggest …
Cops And Cars: How The Automobile Drove Fourth Amendment Law, Tracey Maclin
Cops And Cars: How The Automobile Drove Fourth Amendment Law, Tracey Maclin
UF Law Faculty Publications
This is an essay on Professor Sarah A. Seo’s new book, Policing the Open Road: How Cars Transformed American Freedom (Harvard Univ. Press 2019). I focus on Professor Seo’s analysis of Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925) and Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160 (1949). Carroll is important not only because it was the Court’s first car case. Understanding Carroll (and Brinegar, which solidified and expanded Carroll’s holding) is essential because, nearly one hundred years later, its logic continues to direct how the modern Court resolves Fourth Amendment claims of motorists. Put simply, a majority of today’s …
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams
Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Procedure In Perspective, Kit Kinports
Criminal Procedure In Perspective, Kit Kinports
Kit Kinports
This Article attempts to situate the Supreme Court's constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence in the academic debates surrounding the reasonable person standard, in particular, the extent to which objective standards should incorporate a particular individual's subjective characteristics. Analyzing the Supreme Court's search and seizure and confessions opinions, I find that the Court shifts opportunistically from case to case between subjective and objective tests, and between whose point of view - the police officer's or the defendant's - it views as controlling. Moreover, these deviations cannot be explained either by the principles the Court claims underlie the various constitutional provisions at issue …
Evidence Laundering In A Post-Herring World, Kay L. Levine, Jenia I. Turner, Ronald F. Wright
Evidence Laundering In A Post-Herring World, Kay L. Levine, Jenia I. Turner, Ronald F. Wright
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
The Supreme Court’s decision in Herring v. United States authorizes police to defeat the Fourth Amendment’s protections through a process we call evidence laundering. Evidence laundering occurs when one police officer makes a constitutional mistake when gathering evidence and then passes that evidence along to a second officer, who develops it further and then delivers it to prosecutors for use in a criminal case. When courts admit the evidence based on the good faith of the second officer, the original constitutional taint disappears in the wash.
In the years since Herring was decided, courts have allowed evidence laundering in a …
Teaching Criminal Procedure: Why Socrates Would Use Youtube, Stephen E. Henderson, Joseph Thai
Teaching Criminal Procedure: Why Socrates Would Use Youtube, Stephen E. Henderson, Joseph Thai
Stephen E Henderson
Fourth Amendment Time Machines (And What They Might Say About Police Body Cameras), Stephen E. Henderson
Fourth Amendment Time Machines (And What They Might Say About Police Body Cameras), Stephen E. Henderson
Stephen E Henderson
The Shift Of The Balance Of Advantage In Criminal Litigation: The Case Of Mr. Simpson, David Robinson Jr.
The Shift Of The Balance Of Advantage In Criminal Litigation: The Case Of Mr. Simpson, David Robinson Jr.
Akron Law Review
The intense public interest in the extraordinary trial and acquittal of Mr. O.J. Simpson provides an appropriate occasion to look at the criminal justice system more generally, to note where we have been in the balance of advantage between prosecution and defense, where we are now, and where, perhaps, we should be.
Government Retention And Use Of Unlawfully Secured Dna Evidence, Wayne A. Logan
Government Retention And Use Of Unlawfully Secured Dna Evidence, Wayne A. Logan
Scholarly Publications
No abstract provided.
Neurotechnologies At The Intersection Of Criminal Procedure And Constitutional Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik
Neurotechnologies At The Intersection Of Criminal Procedure And Constitutional Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik
Amanda C Pustilnik
The rapid development of neurotechnologies poses novel constitutional issues for criminal law and criminal procedure. These technologies can identify directly from brain waves whether a person is familiar with a stimulus like a face or a weapon, can model blood flow in the brain to indicate whether a person is lying, and can even interfere with brain processes themselves via high-powered magnets to cause a person to be less likely to lie to an investigator. These technologies implicate the constitutional privilege against compelled, self-incriminating speech under the Fifth Amendment and the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure …
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2007 Term, Susan N. Herman
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2007 Term, Susan N. Herman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Maryland V. King: Terry V. Ohio Redux, Tracey Maclin
Maryland V. King: Terry V. Ohio Redux, Tracey Maclin
UF Law Faculty Publications
In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court addressed whether forensic testing of DNA samples taken from persons arrested for violent felonies violated the Fourth Amendment. The purpose behind DNA testing laws is obvious: collecting and analyzing DNA samples advances the capacity of law enforcement to solve both "cold cases" and future crimes when the government has evidence of the perpetrator's DNA from the crime scene. In a 5-4 decision, the Court, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy, upheld Maryland's DNA testing statute, and presumably the similar laws of twenty-seven other states and the federal government. Although Justice Kennedy's opinion suggests …
Maryland V. King: Terry V. Ohio Redux, Tracey Maclin
Maryland V. King: Terry V. Ohio Redux, Tracey Maclin
Faculty Scholarship
In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court addressed whether forensic testing of DNA samples taken from persons arrested for violent felonies violated the Fourth Amendment. The purpose behind DNA testing laws is obvious: collecting and analyzing DNA samples advances the capacity of law enforcement to solve both "cold cases" and future crimes when the government has evidence of the perpetrator's DNA from the crime scene.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy, upheld Maryland's DNA testing statute, and presumably the similar laws of twenty-seven other states and the federal government.
Although Justice Kennedy's opinion suggests …
The Problem Of Policing, Rachel A. Harmon
The Problem Of Policing, Rachel A. Harmon
Rachel A. Harmon
The legal problem of policing is how to regulate police authority to permit officers to enforce law while also protecting individual liberty and minimizing the social costs the police impose. Courts and commentators have largely treated the problem of policing as limited to preventing violations of constitutional rights and its solution as the judicial definition and enforcement of those rights. But constitutional law and courts alone are necessarily inadequate to regulate the police. Constitutional law does not protect important interests below the constitutional threshold or effectively address the distributional impacts of law enforcement activities. Nor can the judiciary adequately assess …
Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert L. Tsai, Nelson Tebbe
Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert L. Tsai, Nelson Tebbe
Faculty Scholarship
This is a response to Jennifer E. Laurin, "Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence," 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011), which analyzes the Supreme Court's resort to tort-based concepts to limit the reach of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. We press three points. First, there are differences between a general and specific critique of constitutional borrowing. Second, the idea of convergence as a distinct phenomenon from borrowing has explanatory potential and should be further explored. Third, to the extent convergence occurs, it matters whether concerns of judicial administration or political reconstruction are driving doctrinal changes.
Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert Tsai, Nelson Tebbe
Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert Tsai, Nelson Tebbe
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
his is a response to Jennifer E. Laurin, "Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence," 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011), which analyzes the Supreme Court's resort to tort-based concepts to limit the reach of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. We press three points. First, there are differences between a general and specific critique of constitutional borrowing. Second, the idea of convergence as a distinct phenomenon from borrowing has explanatory potential and should be further explored. Third, to the extent convergence occurs, it matters whether concerns of judicial administration or political reconstruction are driving doctrinal changes.
Criminal Procedure In Perspective, Kit Kinports
Criminal Procedure In Perspective, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This Article attempts to situate the Supreme Court's constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence in the academic debates surrounding the reasonable person standard, in particular, the extent to which objective standards should incorporate a particular individual's subjective characteristics. Analyzing the Supreme Court's search and seizure and confessions opinions, I find that the Court shifts opportunistically from case to case between subjective and objective tests, and between whose point of view - the police officer's or the defendant's - it views as controlling. Moreover, these deviations cannot be explained either by the principles the Court claims underlie the various constitutional provisions at issue …
Criminal Procedure: Tenth Circuit Erroneously Allows Officers' Intentions To Define Reasonable Searches: United States V. Carey, Jim Dowell
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Transparent Adjudication And Social Science Research In Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Tracey L. Meares, Bernard Harcourt
Transparent Adjudication And Social Science Research In Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Tracey L. Meares, Bernard Harcourt
Faculty Scholarship
The October 1999 Term was a year of consolidation in the law of police investigations in constitutional criminal procedure. In four short and compact opinions – three supported by sizeable majorities and three written by the Chief Justice – the Supreme Court synthesized and consolidated its criminal procedure jurisprudence, and offered clear guidance to law enforcement officers and private citizens alike. Miranda warnings are required by the Fifth Amendment, and the police must continue to "Mirandize" citizens before conducting any custodial interrogations. Reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment calls for a totality-of-the-circumstances test, and a citizen's flight from the police …
Punishment And Procedure: A Different View Of The American Criminal Justice System, William T. Pizzi
Punishment And Procedure: A Different View Of The American Criminal Justice System, William T. Pizzi
Publications
No abstract provided.
Having It Both Ways: Proof That The U.S. Supreme Court Is "Unfairly" Prosecution-Oriented, Christopher Slobogin
Having It Both Ways: Proof That The U.S. Supreme Court Is "Unfairly" Prosecution-Oriented, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
If the assertions that this essay makes about the Court's "unfair" prosecution-orientation withstand scrutiny," two further conclusions might follow. First, the highest court in the country is so fixated on ensuring that a particular side wins that it is willing with some frequency to sacrifice the most basic attribute of any court worthy of the name-the appearance of fairness. This conclusion is a much more fundamental challenge to the Court's integrity than is the simple acknowledgement that a majority of the Justices are biased in favor of the government. Second, to the extent the Court's unfairness becomes common knowledge, its …
Recent Cases, Daniel P. Smith, R. Michael Moore
Recent Cases, Daniel P. Smith, R. Michael Moore
Vanderbilt Law Review
Courts Split on the Necessity of Separate Authorization for a Covert Entry Under Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968
Daniel Paul Smith
Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968,' which regulates the use of electronic surveillance, was designed to protect "the privacy of wire and oral communications,"and to delineate "on a uniform basis the circumstances and conditions under which the interception of wire and oral communications may be authorized."' In general, communications may be intercepted only by law enforcement officers, who are engaged in the investigation of …
Gerstein V. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (1975); In Re Florida Rules Of Criminal Procedure, 309 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 1975), R. Wayne Miller
Gerstein V. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (1975); In Re Florida Rules Of Criminal Procedure, 309 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 1975), R. Wayne Miller
Florida State University Law Review
Criminal Procedure- PRELIMINARY HEARINGS- NONADVERSARY JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE TO DETAIN IS PREREQUISITE TO EXTENDED RESTRAINT OF LIBERTY FOLLOWING ARREST.