Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (35)
- Pepperdine University (8)
- Seattle University School of Law (8)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (7)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (7)
-
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (6)
- New York Law School (5)
- St. Mary's University (5)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (4)
- St. John's University School of Law (4)
- The University of Akron (4)
- University of Richmond (4)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (4)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (4)
- Brooklyn Law School (3)
- Georgia State University College of Law (3)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (3)
- University of Georgia School of Law (3)
- University of Michigan Law School (3)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (2)
- Seton Hall University (2)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (2)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Florida State University College of Law (1)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (1)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (35)
- Pepperdine Law Review (8)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (7)
- Seattle University Law Review (7)
- Oklahoma Law Review (6)
-
- Catholic University Law Review (5)
- NYLS Law Review (5)
- Akron Law Review (4)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (4)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (4)
- University of Richmond Law Review (4)
- Villanova Law Review (4)
- Georgia State University Law Review (3)
- Michigan Law Review (3)
- St. John's Law Review (3)
- Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice (3)
- Brooklyn Law Review (2)
- Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology (2)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (2)
- Georgia Law Review (2)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
- Nevada Law Journal (2)
- Seton Hall Circuit Review (2)
- Arkansas Law Review (1)
- Barry Law Review (1)
- Emory Law Journal (1)
- FIU Law Review (1)
- Florida State University Law Review (1)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (1)
- IUSTITIA (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 141
Full-Text Articles in Law
Computationally Assessing Suspicion, Wesley M. Oliver, Morgan A. Gray, Jaromir Savelka, Kevin D. Ashley
Computationally Assessing Suspicion, Wesley M. Oliver, Morgan A. Gray, Jaromir Savelka, Kevin D. Ashley
University of Cincinnati Law Review
Law enforcement officers performing drug interdiction on interstate highways have to decide nearly every day whether there is reasonable suspicion to detain motorists until a trained dog can sniff for the presence of drugs. The officers’ assessments are often wrong, however, and lead to unnecessary detentions of innocent persons and the suppression of drugs found on guilty ones. We propose a computational method of evaluating suspicion in these encounters and offer experimental results from early efforts demonstrating its feasibility. With the assistance of large language and predictive machine learning models, it appears that judges, advocates, and even police officers could …
The Mosaic Theory In Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence: The Last Bastion Of Privacy In A Camera-Surveilled World, Auggie Alvarado
The Mosaic Theory In Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence: The Last Bastion Of Privacy In A Camera-Surveilled World, Auggie Alvarado
St. Mary's Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Arrests: Legal And Illegal, Daniel Yeager
Arrests: Legal And Illegal, Daniel Yeager
Georgia State University Law Review
The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. An arrest—manifesting a police intention to transport a suspect to the stationhouse for booking, fingerprinting, and photographing—is a mode of seizure. Because arrests are so intrusive, they require roughly a fifty percent chance that an arrestable offense has occurred. Because nonarrest seizures (aka Terry stops), though no “petty indignity,” are less intrusive than arrests, they require roughly just a twenty-five percent chance that crime is afoot.
Any arrest not supported by probable cause is illegal. It would therefore seem to follow that any arrest supported by probable cause is legal. But it …
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 …
Community Caretaking Exception Saves Lives . . . The Supreme Court Disagrees, Gabriella Lorenzo
Community Caretaking Exception Saves Lives . . . The Supreme Court Disagrees, Gabriella Lorenzo
Touro Law Review
As many are aware, the Fourth Amendment protects the people against unreasonable searches and seizures. A warrant is necessary for said activities. While there are a few exceptions to the warrant requirement, the Supreme Court recently held that the community caretaking exception does not extend to the home. Extending this exception to the home would allow police officers to enter and engage in functions that are unrelated to the investigation of a crime. Essentially, this exception would allow police to aid individuals and prevent serious, dangerous situations to protect the community. This Note discusses why the Supreme Court erred in …
The Modern Border: The Government Can Search . . . Anything?, Abigail Nusbaum
The Modern Border: The Government Can Search . . . Anything?, Abigail Nusbaum
FIU Law Review
The evolution of modern technology has introduced new obstacles in interpreting the Fourth Amendment’s application to searches of peoples’ effects. Specifically, the longstanding exception to the Fourth Amendment permitting searches at the international border in the absence of probable cause does not so neatly apply to forensic searches of cell phones. Consequently, a circuit split has emerged on two aspects of the issue: the scope of the border exception and the requisite level of suspicion within that exception. The Supreme Court should find that forensic cell phone searches at the international border implicate Fourth Amendment privacy interests, requiring the border …
You Can’T Teach Old Katz New Tricks: It’S Time To Revitalize The Fourth Amendment, Jeremy Connell
You Can’T Teach Old Katz New Tricks: It’S Time To Revitalize The Fourth Amendment, Jeremy Connell
University of Miami Law Review
For over half a century, the Court’s decision in Katz v. United States has been the lodestar for applying the Fourth Amendment. The Katz test has produced a litany of confusing and irreconcilable decisions in which the Court has carved exceptions into the doctrine and then carved exceptions into the exceptions. These decisions often leave lower courts with minimal guidance on how to apply the framework to new sets of facts and leave legal scholars and commenters befuddled and frustrated with the Court’s explanations for the rulings. The Court’s decision in Carpenter v. United States represents the apex of Katz’s …
Was Atwater V. Lago Vista Decided Correctly? The Fourth Amendment's Shadow And Simulacra Of Police Brutality And The American Dream, Charles Lincoln
Was Atwater V. Lago Vista Decided Correctly? The Fourth Amendment's Shadow And Simulacra Of Police Brutality And The American Dream, Charles Lincoln
Barry Law Review
No abstract provided.
A New Test For The New Crime Exception, Colin Miller
A New Test For The New Crime Exception, Colin Miller
Utah Law Review
The new crime exception to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule allows prosecutors to introduce evidence connected to new crimes committed by defendants who were illegally detained and/or questioned. Unfortunately, as illustrated in this Article, courts largely have applied this new crime exception without any analytical framework or regard for the severity of the initial police misconduct or the defendant’s response. Moreover, courts have begun applying the new crime exception to crimes such as giving a fake name in response to an un-Mirandized interrogation following a lawful arrest.
By doing so, courts have allowed the new crime exception to swallow two …
On Warrants & Waiting: Electronic Warrants & The Fourth Amendment, Tracy Hresko Pearl
On Warrants & Waiting: Electronic Warrants & The Fourth Amendment, Tracy Hresko Pearl
Indiana Law Journal
Police use of electronic warrant (“e-warrant”) technology has increased significantly in recent years. E-warrant technology allows law enforcement to submit, and magistrate judges to review and approve, warrant applications on computers, smartphones, and tablets, often without any direct communication. Police officers report that they favor e-warrants over their traditional, paper counterparts because they save officers a significant amount of time in applying for warrants by eliminating the need to appear in-person before a magistrate. Legal scholars have almost uniformly praised e-warrant technology as well, arguing that use of these systems will increase the number of warrants issued throughout the United …
Scanning Iphones To Save Children: Apple’S On-Device Hashing Algorithm Should Survive A Fourth Amendment Challenge, Timothy Gernand
Scanning Iphones To Save Children: Apple’S On-Device Hashing Algorithm Should Survive A Fourth Amendment Challenge, Timothy Gernand
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
When Apple announced it would combat the growth of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on its platform by scanning all its users’ devices without their consent, many of its loyal customers felt betrayed. With tech companies such as Google and Facebook arranging their business models around selling their customers’ personal information, Apple customers saw the company’s focus on privacy as a refreshing alternative. However, as Apple itself privately acknowledged, this emphasis on privacy had led to it becoming a haven for CSAM. Despite the reputational damage it would incur with its customers, Apple resolved to confront CSAM on its platform …
Criminal Procedure—Technology In The Modern Era: The Implications Of Carpenter V. United States And The Limits Of The Third-Party Doctrine As To Cell Phone Data Gathered Through Real-Time Tracking, Stingrays, And Cell Tower Dumps, Deepali Lal
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Computer Got It Wrong: Facial Recognition Technology And Establishing Probable Cause To Arrest, T.J. Benedict
The Computer Got It Wrong: Facial Recognition Technology And Establishing Probable Cause To Arrest, T.J. Benedict
Washington and Lee Law Review
Facial recognition technology (FRT) is a popular tool among police, who use it to identify suspects using photographs or still-images from videos. The technology is far from perfect. Recent studies highlight that many FRT systems are less effective at identifying people of color, women, older people, and children. These race, gender, and age biases arise because FRT is often “trained” using non-diverse faces. As a result, police have wrongfully arrested Black men based on mistaken FRT identifications. This Note explores the intersection of facial recognition technology and probable cause to arrest.
Courts rarely, if ever, examine FRT’s role in establishing …
Tech And Authoritarianism: How The People’S Republic Of China Is Using Data To Control Hong Kong And Why The U.S. Is Vulnerable, Bryce Neary
Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law
The aim of this article is to analyze and compare current events in the People's Republic of China and the United States to discuss the moral dilemmas that arise when establishing the boundary between national security interests and individual privacy rights. As we continue to intertwine our lives with technology, it has become increasingly important to establish clear privacy rights. The question then becomes: at what point should individuals sacrifice their rights for what the government considers the "greater good" of the country?
Further, this article analyzes the development of U.S. privacy law and its relationship to national security, technology, …
Facebook, Crime Prevention, And The Scope Of The Private Search Post-Carpenter, Connor M. Correll
Facebook, Crime Prevention, And The Scope Of The Private Search Post-Carpenter, Connor M. Correll
Georgia Law Review
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects people “against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The private search doctrine provides a notable exception to the Fourth Amendment, providing that the government may reconstruct a search previously performed by a private party without first obtaining a warrant. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the private search doctrine prior to the advent of the internet; however, modern technology has changed the way that individuals live. What was once done entirely in private is now done alongside ever-present third parties, such as cell phones and virtual assistants.
Facebook and other social media sites complicate Fourth …
Police Perceptions, Knowledge, And Performance: Traffic Stops And The Use Of K-9 Units, Christopher D. Totten, Gang Lee, Daniel Ozment
Police Perceptions, Knowledge, And Performance: Traffic Stops And The Use Of K-9 Units, Christopher D. Totten, Gang Lee, Daniel Ozment
Catholic University Law Review
This empirical (survey) study of law enforcement officers aims to shed light on police conduct and knowledge concerning traffic stops, vehicle searches and the use of canine (K-9) units. This context is particularly relevant in light of a recent United States Supreme Court case in this area, Rodriguez v. United States, which held that when the mission of a routine traffic stop has been or reasonably should have been completed (i.e., the officer has issued a traffic ticket or a warning after having checked license, registration, insurance, and/ or warrants), the officer may not in general detain the vehicle …
Bitcoin Searches And Preserving The Third-Party Doctrine, Christine A. Cortez
Bitcoin Searches And Preserving The Third-Party Doctrine, Christine A. Cortez
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract forthcoming.
Cloudy With A Chance Of Government Intrusion: The Third-Party Doctrine In The 21st Century, Steven Arango
Cloudy With A Chance Of Government Intrusion: The Third-Party Doctrine In The 21st Century, Steven Arango
Catholic University Law Review
Technology may be created by humans, but we are dependent on it. Look around you: what technology is near you as you read this abstract? An iPhone? A laptop? Perhaps even an Amazon Echo. What do all these devices have in common? They store data in the cloud. And this data can contain some of our most sensitive information, such as business records or medical documents.
Even if you manage this cloud storage account, the government may be able to search your data without a warrant. Federal law provides little protection for cloud stored data. And the Fourth Amendment may …
Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin
Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Supreme Court of the United States ("Supreme Court") will hear oral arguments in this matter on Tuesday, March 23, 2021. This case presents the narrow issue of whether a tribal police officer has the authority to investigate and detain a non-Indian on a public right-of-way within a reservation for a suspected violation of state or federal law. The lower courts, holding that tribes have no such authority, granted James Cooley’s motion to suppress evidence. The Supreme Court must decide whether the lower courts erred in so deciding. While the issue before the Supreme Court is itself narrow, it has …
School “Safety” Measures Jump Constitutional Guardrails, Maryam Ahranjani
School “Safety” Measures Jump Constitutional Guardrails, Maryam Ahranjani
Seattle University Law Review
In the wake of George Floyd’s murder and efforts to achieve racial justice through systemic reform, this Article argues that widespread “security” measures in public schools, including embedded law enforcement officers, jump constitutional guardrails. These measures must be rethought in light of their negative impact on all children and in favor of more effective—and constitutionally compliant—alternatives to promote school safety. The Black Lives Matter, #DefundthePolice, #abolishthepolice, and #DefundSchoolPolice movements shine a timely and bright spotlight on how the prisonization of public schools leads to the mistreatment of children, particularly children with disabilities, boys, Black and brown children, and low-income children. …
Ring, Amazon Calling: The State Action Doctrine & The Fourth Amendment, Grace Egger
Ring, Amazon Calling: The State Action Doctrine & The Fourth Amendment, Grace Egger
Washington Law Review Online
Video doorbells have proliferated across the United States and Amazon owns one of the most popular video doorbell companies on the market—Ring. While many view the Ring video doorbell as useful technology that protects the home and promotes safer neighborhoods, the product reduces consumer privacy without much recourse. For example, Ring partners with cities and law enforcement agencies across the United States thereby creating a mass surveillance network in which law enforcement agencies can watch neighborhoods and access Ring data without the user’s knowledge or consent. Because Amazon is not a state actor, it is able to circumvent the due …
Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
This essay posits that Justice Sotomayor is the Court’s chief defender of the Fourth Amendment and the cherished values it protects. She has consistently defended Fourth Amendment freedoms—in majority, concurring, and especially in dissenting opinions. Part I recounts a few of her majority opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. Part II examines her concurring opinion in United States v. Jones. Part III examines several of her dissenting opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. A review of these opinions demonstrates what should be clear to any observer of the Supreme Court: Justice Sotomayor consistently defends Fourth Amendment principles and values.
Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand
Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand
Arkansas Law Review
In a 5-4 opinion, the United States Supreme Court once again denied a Bivens action. This case involved a tragic crossborder shooting by a border patrol agent standing on United States soil, who shot and killed a young boy standing on Mexican soil. Petitioners, the boy’s parents, sought relief under Biven2, arguing the agent’s action violated the Constitution. However, the Court determined the cross-border shooting was a new Bivens context, which required an analysis of whether any special factors “counseled hesitation” for the cause of action to be extended. The Court concluded Bivens was inappropriate because several factors “counseled hesitation”—namely, …
Dna Is Different: An Exploration Of The Current Inadequacies Of Genetic Privacy Protection In Recreational Dna Databases, Jamie M. Zeevi
Dna Is Different: An Exploration Of The Current Inadequacies Of Genetic Privacy Protection In Recreational Dna Databases, Jamie M. Zeevi
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
Part I of this Note discusses the fundamental science behind DNA and defines and explains the process of familial DNA searching. Part I also discusses how Carpenter v. United States provides a framework to begin thinking about the unique nature of DNA and privacy implications for its use, and why the revealing nature of this type of data warrants protection. Part II of this Note delves into the lack of constitutional and statutory protections for DNA in recreational DNA databases. First, Part II explains that traditional Fourth Amendment concepts, like search warrants, probable cause, reasonable expectation of privacy, third-party …
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 …
United States V. Touset, Katelyn James
Protecting Online Privacy In The Digital Age: Carpenter V. United States And The Fourth Amendment’S Third-Party Doctrine, Cristina Del Rosso, Carol M. Bast
Protecting Online Privacy In The Digital Age: Carpenter V. United States And The Fourth Amendment’S Third-Party Doctrine, Cristina Del Rosso, Carol M. Bast
Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology
The goal of this paper is to examine the future of the third-party doctrine with the proliferation of technology and the online data we are surrounded with daily, specifically after the Supreme Court’s decision in Carpenter v. United States. It is imperative that individuals do not forfeit their Constitutional guarantees for the benefit of living in a technologically advanced society. This requires an understanding of the modern-day functional equivalents of “papers” and “effects.”
Looking to the future, this paper contemplates solutions on how to move forward in this technology era by scrutinizing the relevancy of the third-party doctrine due …
Recalibrating Suspicion In An Era Of Hazy Legality, Deborah Ahrens
Recalibrating Suspicion In An Era Of Hazy Legality, Deborah Ahrens
Seattle University Law Review
After a century of employing varying levels of prohibition enforced by criminal law, the United States has entered an era where individual states are rethinking marijuana policy, and the majority of states have in some way decided to make cannabis legally available. This symposium Article will offer a description of what has happened in the past few years, as well as ideas for how jurisdictions can use the changing legal status of cannabis to reshape criminal procedure more broadly. This Article will recommend that law enforcement no longer be permitted use the smell of marijuana as a reason to search …
A Warrant Requirement Resurgence? The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Benjamin J. Priester
A Warrant Requirement Resurgence? The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Benjamin J. Priester
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
Over many years, the United States Supreme Court has developed an extensive body of precedent interpreting and enforcing the provisions of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement agents conducting criminal investigations. Commonly called the “warrant requirement,” one key component of this case law operates to deem some police investigatory techniques to be unconstitutional unless they are conducted pursuant to a search warrant issued in advance by a judge. The terms of the doctrine and its exceptions also authorize other investigatory actions as constitutionally permissible without a search warrant. …
Nowhere To Run, Nowhere To Hide.* Applying The Fourth Amendment To Connected Cars In The Internet-Of-Things Era, Gregory C. Brown, Jr.
Nowhere To Run, Nowhere To Hide.* Applying The Fourth Amendment To Connected Cars In The Internet-Of-Things Era, Gregory C. Brown, Jr.
Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development
(Excerpt)
Part I of this Note will briefly discuss the key components of a Connected Car, identify who collects the data from the Car, and examine the various uses for the data. Part I also explores whether Car owners consent to the collection of their Car’s data. Part II-A will trace the historical development of the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, which generally permits law-enforcement officers to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle. Part II-B will discuss how the Supreme Court has applied the Fourth Amendment to pre-Internet technologies. Part II-C will discuss two recent Fourth Amendment Supreme …