Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- William & Mary Law School (9)
- Selected Works (5)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (5)
- Penn State Law (3)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (3)
-
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Claremont Colleges (1)
- Georgia State University College of Law (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (1)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (1)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of New Hampshire (1)
- University of Washington School of Law (1)
- West Virginia University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Villanova Law Review (5)
- Journal Articles (4)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (4)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Supreme Court Case Files (3)
-
- William & Mary Law Review (3)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (2)
- Kit Kinports (2)
- Popular Media (2)
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Articles (1)
- CMC Senior Theses (1)
- Georgia State University Law Review (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Laurence A. Benner (1)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Lawrence Rosenthal (1)
- Nevada Law Journal (1)
- Stephen E Henderson (1)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (1)
- University of Miami Law Review (1)
- West Virginia Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 43
Full-Text Articles in Law
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 …
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 …
Frankly, It's A Mess: Requiring Courts To Transparently "Redline" Affidavits In The Face Of Franks Challenges, Diana Bibb
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Part I provides a brief overview of the Fourth Amendment, probable cause, and the exclusionary rule. Part II discusses Franks v. Delaware, the development of the challenge’s framework, and subsequent expansions to the doctrine made by the lower courts. Next, Part III argues that, despite the aforementioned expansions, courts have consistently weakened Franks. Notably, the Supreme Court refuses to consider Franks issues, including the multitude of splits over which standard of review is applicable. Moreover, some circuits have developed their own minute rules that have chiseled away at the effectiveness of a Franks challenge. Part IV proposes that …
Divided Court Issues Bright-Line Ruling On Fourth Amendment Seizures, Jeffrey Bellin
Divided Court Issues Bright-Line Ruling On Fourth Amendment Seizures, Jeffrey Bellin
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Case Preview: When Is A Fleeing Suspect “Seized”?, Jeffrey Bellin
Case Preview: When Is A Fleeing Suspect “Seized”?, Jeffrey Bellin
Popular Media
The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable “searches” and “seizures.” On Wednesday, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral argument in Torres v. Madrid, a case that will provide important guidance on what constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure. Here’s a rundown of the case starting with the relevant facts and procedural history, followed by a discussion of the legal issues and finally a couple of things to watch for at the argument.
A Third-Party Doctrine For Digital Metadata, H. Brian Holland
A Third-Party Doctrine For Digital Metadata, H. Brian Holland
Faculty Scholarship
For more than four decades, the third-party doctrine was understood as a bright-line, categorical rule: there is no legitimate privacy interest in any data that is voluntarily disclosed or conveyed to a third party. But this simple rule has dramatic effects in a world of ubiquitous networked computing, mobile technologies, and the commodification of information. The digital devices that facilitate our daily participation in modern society are connected through automated infrastructures that are designed to generate vast quantities of data, nearly all of which is captured, utilized, and stored by third-party service providers. Under a plain reading of the third-party …
The Origins And Legacy Of The Fourth Amendment Reasonableness Balancing Model, Kit Kinports
The Origins And Legacy Of The Fourth Amendment Reasonableness Balancing Model, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
The overwhelming majority of the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment cases over the past fifty years have been resolved using a warrant presumption model, which determines the constitutionality of a search or seizure by asking whether law enforcement officials had probable cause and a warrant, or some exception to those requirements. But three decisions, beginning in 2001, mysteriously deviated from that approach and applied a reasonableness balancing model, upholding the searches in those cases after considering the totality of the circumstances and weighing the competing government interests against the defendant’s privacy interests. This balancing approach has justifiably been criticized as amorphous, …
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 …
Lawful Searches Incident To Unlawful Arrests: A Reform Proposal, Mark A. Summers
Lawful Searches Incident To Unlawful Arrests: A Reform Proposal, Mark A. Summers
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Exclusionary Rule In The Age Of Blue Data, Andrew Ferguson
The Exclusionary Rule In The Age Of Blue Data, Andrew Ferguson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
In Herring v. United States, Chief Justice John Roberts reframed the Supreme Court’s understanding of the exclusionary rule: “As laid out in our cases, the exclusionary rule serves to deter deliberate, reckless, or grossly negligent conduct, or in some circumstances recurring or systemic negligence.” The open question remains: how can defendants demonstrate sufficient recurring or systemic negligence to warrant exclusion? The Supreme Court has never answered the question, although the absence of systemic or recurring problems has figured prominently in two recent exclusionary rule decisions. Without the ability to document recurring failures, or patterns of police misconduct, courts can dismiss …
Harmless Constitutional Error: How A Minor Doctrine Meant To Improve Judicial Efficiency Is Eroding America's Founding Ideals, Ross C. Reggio
Harmless Constitutional Error: How A Minor Doctrine Meant To Improve Judicial Efficiency Is Eroding America's Founding Ideals, Ross C. Reggio
CMC Senior Theses
The United States Constitution had been in existence for almost two hundred years before the Supreme Court decided that some violations of constitutional rights may be too insignificant to warrant remedial action. Known as "harmless error," this statutory doctrine allows a court to affirm a conviction when a mere technicality or minor defect did not affect the defendant's substantial rights. The doctrine aims to promote judicial efficiency and judgment finality. The Court first applied harmless error to constitutional violations by shifting the statutory test away from the error's effect on substantial rights to its impact on the jury's verdict. Over …
Fourth Amendment Anxiety, Stephen E. Henderson, Kiel Brennan-Marquez
Fourth Amendment Anxiety, Stephen E. Henderson, Kiel Brennan-Marquez
Stephen E Henderson
The Fourth Amendment Disclosure Doctrines, Monu Bedi
The Fourth Amendment Disclosure Doctrines, Monu Bedi
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
The third party and public disclosure doctrines (together the “disclosure doctrines”) are long-standing hurdles to Fourth Amendment protection. These doctrines have become increasingly relevant to assessing the government’s use of recent technologies such as data mining, drone surveillance, and cell site location data. It is surprising then that both the Supreme Court and scholars, at times, have associated them together as expressing one principle. It turns out that each relies on unique foundational triggers and does not stand or fall with the other. This Article tackles this issue and provides a comprehensive topology for analyzing the respective contours of each …
Veteran Police Officers And Three-Dollar Steaks: The Subjective/Objective Dimensions Of Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion, Kit Kinports
Kit Kinports
This Article addresses two issues surrounding probable cause and reasonable suspicion that test the line between subjective and objective standards in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence: the extent to which a particular police officer’s training and experience ought to be considered in measuring probable cause and reasonable suspicion, and the relevance of the officer’s subjective beliefs about the presence of a weapon in assessing the reasonable suspicion required to justify a frisk. Although both questions have split the lower courts and remain unresolved by the Supreme Court, the majority of courts treat them inconsistently, recognizing the importance of an officer’s training, experience, …
Diminishing Probable Cause And Minimalist Searches, Kit Kinports
Diminishing Probable Cause And Minimalist Searches, Kit Kinports
Kit Kinports
This paper comments on recent Supreme Court opinions that have used phrases such as "reasonable belief" and "reason to believe" when analyzing intrusions that generally require proof of probable cause. Historically, the Court used these terms as shorthand references for both probable cause and reasonable suspicion. While this lack of precision was unobjectionable when the concepts were interchangeable, that has not been true since Terry v. Ohio created a distinction between the two standards. When the Justices then resurrect these terms without situating them in the dichotomy between probable cause and reasonable suspicion, it is not clear whether they are …
Government Analysis Of Shed Dna Is A Search Under The Fourth Amendment, Tracey Maclin
Government Analysis Of Shed Dna Is A Search Under The Fourth Amendment, Tracey Maclin
Faculty Scholarship
This article addresses whether the Fourth Amendment is implicated when police surreptitiously collect and analyze a person’s involuntarily shed DNA.
Law enforcement officers will often obtain shed or abandoned DNA samples from persons who they suspect have committed crimes, but lack sufficient evidence to arrest or detain such persons. When utilizing abandoned or shed DNA for criminal investigative purposes, there are two state actions which arguably trigger Fourth Amendment protection. First, the collection of the biological material which contains a person’s DNA might be considered a search under the amendment. Courts, however, have uniformly rejected this argument. For example, when …
Social-Network Theory And The Diffusion Of The Search-And-Seizure Exclusionary Rule Among State Courts Between Weeks And Wolf, Laurence A. Benner, Robert Bird, Donald J. Smythe
Social-Network Theory And The Diffusion Of The Search-And-Seizure Exclusionary Rule Among State Courts Between Weeks And Wolf, Laurence A. Benner, Robert Bird, Donald J. Smythe
Laurence A. Benner
No abstract provided.
Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind
Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind
William & Mary Law Review
It is routinely assumed that there is a trade-off between police efficiency and the warrant requirement. But existing analysis ignores the interaction between law-enforcement investigative practices and criminal innovation. Narrowing the definition of a search or otherwise limiting the requirement for a warrant gives criminals greater incentive to innovate to avoid detection. With limited resources to develop countermeasures, law enforcement officers will often be just as effective at capturing criminals when facing higher Fourth Amendment hurdles. We provide a game-theoretic model that shows that when law-enforcement investigation and criminal innovation are considered in a dynamic context, the police efficiency rationale …
Government Analysis Of Shed Dna Is A Search Under The Fourth Amendment, Tracey Maclin
Government Analysis Of Shed Dna Is A Search Under The Fourth Amendment, Tracey Maclin
UF Law Faculty Publications
This article addresses whether the Fourth Amendment is implicated when police surreptitiously collect and analyze a person’s involuntarily shed DNA. Law enforcement officers will often obtain shed or abandoned DNA samples from persons who they suspect have committed crimes, but lack sufficient evidence to arrest or detain such persons. When utilizing abandoned or shed DNA for criminal investigative purposes, there are two state actions which arguably trigger Fourth Amendment protection. First, the collection of the biological material which contains a person’s DNA might be considered a search under the amendment. Courts, however, have uniformly rejected this argument. For example, when …
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
Georgia State University Law Review
One area in which law enforcement agencies have stretched constitutional limits concerns the scope of a suspect’s consent to search his or her vehicle. Police forces across the country have tested the limits of consent by asking vague, conversational questions to suspects with the goal of obtaining a suspect’s consent to search, even though that individual may not want to allow the search or may not know that he or she has the right to deny consent.
Conversational phrases like “Can I take a quick look?” or “Can I take a quick look around?” have “emerg[ed] as . . . …
Binary Searches And The Central Meaning Of The Fourth Amendment, Lawrence Rosenthal
Binary Searches And The Central Meaning Of The Fourth Amendment, Lawrence Rosenthal
Lawrence Rosenthal
Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is frequently accused of doctrinal incoherence. A primary reason is the persistence of two competing conceptions of “unreasonable” search and seizure. The first is libertarian in character; it understands the Fourth Amendment’s command of reasonableness as establishing a constitutional boundary on investigative powers. On this view, the prohibition on unreasonable search and seizure keeps society free by limiting the government’s investigative reach. The second conception understands the Fourth Amendment's prohibition as freedom against unjustified government intrusion. This conception of reasonableness is essentially pragmatic in character, balancing liberty and law-enforcement interests.
This article interrogates these competing conceptions by …
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Seattle University Law Review
This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …
Passing The Sniff Test: Police Dogs As Surveillance Technology, Irus Braverman
Passing The Sniff Test: Police Dogs As Surveillance Technology, Irus Braverman
Journal Articles
In October 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States will review the case of Florida v. Jardines, which revolves around the constitutionality of police canine Franky’s sniff outside a private residence. Essentially, the Court will need to decide whether or not the sniff constitutes a “search” for Fourth Amendment purposes. This Article presents a review of the often-contradictory case law that exists on this question to suggest that underlying the various cases is the Courts’ assumption of a juxtaposed relationship between nature and technology. Where dog sniffs are perceived as a technology, the courts have been inclined to also …
Indecent Exposure: Do Warrantless Searches Of Cell Phones Violate The Fourth Amendment?, Amy Vorenberg
Indecent Exposure: Do Warrantless Searches Of Cell Phones Violate The Fourth Amendment?, Amy Vorenberg
Law Faculty Scholarship
This article argues that searches of student’s cell phone should require a warrant in most circumstances. The amount and personal nature of information on a smart phone warrants special Fourth Amendment protection. This issue is particularly relevant in the public school setting where administrators routinely confiscate phones from students caught using them in school. With more frequency, administrators are looking at the phones, scrolling through text messages and photos, and on some occasions, responding to text messages.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Safford v. Redding, acknowledges the special considerations that school children should be afforded in part because of the …
Crime Mapping And The Fourth Amendment: Redrawing 'High Crime Areas', Andrew Ferguson
Crime Mapping And The Fourth Amendment: Redrawing 'High Crime Areas', Andrew Ferguson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
This article addresses how “crime mapping” technology has the potential to reshape Fourth Amendment protections in designated “high crime areas.” In the past few years, the ability of police administrators to identify and officially label “high crime areas” has rapidly expanded. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and crime mapping technology has simplified the collection and analysis of crime statistics. These GIS crime mapping technologies can produce almost perfect information about the level, rate, and geographic location of crimes in any given area.While effective policing tools, these technologies have constitutional consequences that are only now being considered. Under existing Supreme Court precedent, …
The Inviolate Home: Housing Exceptionalism In The Fourth Amendment, Stephanie M. Stern
The Inviolate Home: Housing Exceptionalism In The Fourth Amendment, Stephanie M. Stern
All Faculty Scholarship
The ideal of the inviolate home dominates the Fourth Amendment. The case law accords stricter protection to residential search and seizure than to many other privacy incursions. The focus on protection of the physical home has decreased doctrinal efficiency and coherence and derailed Fourth Amendment residential privacy from the core principle of intimate association. This Article challenges Fourth Amendment housing exceptionalism. Specifically, I critique two hallmarks of housing exceptionalism: first, the extension of protection to residential spaces unlikely to shelter intimate association or implicate other key privacy interests; and second, the prohibition of searches that impinge on core living spaces …
Veteran Police Officers And Three-Dollar Steaks: The Subjective/Objective Dimensions Of Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This Article addresses two issues surrounding probable cause and reasonable suspicion that test the line between subjective and objective standards in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence: the extent to which a particular police officer’s training and experience ought to be considered in measuring probable cause and reasonable suspicion, and the relevance of the officer’s subjective beliefs about the presence of a weapon in assessing the reasonable suspicion required to justify a frisk. Although both questions have split the lower courts and remain unresolved by the Supreme Court, the majority of courts treat them inconsistently, recognizing the importance of an officer’s training, experience, …
Fourth Amendment Remedial Equilibration: A Comment On Herring V. United States And Pearson V. Callahan, David B. Owens
Fourth Amendment Remedial Equilibration: A Comment On Herring V. United States And Pearson V. Callahan, David B. Owens
Articles
In two recent decisions, the Supreme Court addressed remedies under the Fourth Amendment by assuming that this remedial construction did not alter the value of the underlying right meant to be protected by the Constitution. First, in Herring v. United States, the court broadened exceptions to the exclusionary rule and implied that suppression may not be required for "negligent" errors generally. Then, in Pearson v. Callahan, the Court abandoned it's "battle-of-order" rule - which required courts to consider the right before inquiring whether that right was "clearly established" at the time of the violation - when considering qualified …
Diminishing Probable Cause And Minimalist Searches, Kit Kinports
Diminishing Probable Cause And Minimalist Searches, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This paper comments on recent Supreme Court opinions that have used phrases such as "reasonable belief" and "reason to believe" when analyzing intrusions that generally require proof of probable cause. Historically, the Court used these terms as shorthand references for both probable cause and reasonable suspicion. While this lack of precision was unobjectionable when the concepts were interchangeable, that has not been true since Terry v. Ohio created a distinction between the two standards. When the Justices then resurrect these terms without situating them in the dichotomy between probable cause and reasonable suspicion, it is not clear whether they are …
Identity Crisis: United States V. Hiibel And The Continued Erosion Of Privacy Rights, Beth Rosenblum
Identity Crisis: United States V. Hiibel And The Continued Erosion Of Privacy Rights, Beth Rosenblum
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.