Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
You Booze, You Bruise, You Lose: Analyzing The Constitutionality Of Florida’S Involuntary Blood Draw Statute In The Wake Of Missouri V. Mcneely, Francisco D. Zornosa
You Booze, You Bruise, You Lose: Analyzing The Constitutionality Of Florida’S Involuntary Blood Draw Statute In The Wake Of Missouri V. Mcneely, Francisco D. Zornosa
Francisco D Zornosa
No abstract provided.
Whose Metadata Is It Anyways? Why Riley V. California Illustrates That The National Security Administration's Bulk Data Collection Is A Fourth Amendment Problem, Jesse S. Weinstein
Whose Metadata Is It Anyways? Why Riley V. California Illustrates That The National Security Administration's Bulk Data Collection Is A Fourth Amendment Problem, Jesse S. Weinstein
Jesse S Weinstein
No abstract provided.
Abidor V. Napolitano: Suspicionless Cell Phone And Laptop Searches At The Border Compromise The Fourth And First Amendments, Adam Lamparello, Charles Maclean
Abidor V. Napolitano: Suspicionless Cell Phone And Laptop Searches At The Border Compromise The Fourth And First Amendments, Adam Lamparello, Charles Maclean
Adam Lamparello
The article explores the December 31, 2013 Abidor decision where the federal district court upheld the ongoing application of the border search exception as applied to deep, forensic searches of laptops and other digital devices. That exception allows suspicionless searches of any persons, effects, and “closed containers” crossing a border into the United States, and laptops and external hard drives are generally considered “closed containers” under the border search exception. We argue that the border search exception, grounded as it is in pre-digital age fact patterns, should no longer serve as precedent for border searches of the immense memories of …
Amicus Brief -- Riley V. California And United States V. Wurie, Charles E. Maclean, Adam Lamparello
Amicus Brief -- Riley V. California And United States V. Wurie, Charles E. Maclean, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
Warrantless searches of cell phone memory—after a suspect has been arrested, and after law enforcement has seized the phone—would have been unconstitutional at the time the Fourth Amendment was adopted, and are unconstitutional now. Simply stated, they are unreasonable. And reasonableness—not a categorical warrant requirement—is the “touchstone of Fourth Amendment analysis.”
The Rise And Fall Of The Exclusionary Rule, Albert E. Poirier Jr.
The Rise And Fall Of The Exclusionary Rule, Albert E. Poirier Jr.
Albert E Poirier Jr.
The years between 1913 and 1967 saw a growing tendency on the part of the Supreme Court to allow the submission of evidence that had been gained unlawfully by the police or prosecutors. Since 1961, and particularly during the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts, the rules excluding evidence have steadily diminished. This paper seeks to review the history of the exclusionary rule.