Law Commons^™

The Changing Tradition Of Constitutional Review Of Sign And Billboard Regulation, Ronald H. Rosenberg

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Entrapment, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Criminal Discovery, Scientific Evidence, And Dna, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Police Interrogations And Confessions, Paul C. Giannelli

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Police Under The Gun, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

Back in 1968, Justice William O. Douglas warned in a dissenting opinion in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, that the Court was opening a Pandora's box by eschewing the traditional "probable cause" standard for Fourth Amendment search and seizures in traffic stop cases, and permitting warrantless detentions based merely on "reasonable suspicion."

More than a quarter-century later, the confusion over the "reasonable suspicion" approach is still commanding the Supreme Court's attention. A pair of cases on the justices' argument calendar this spring address the tension between legitimate traffic stops and those based on pretext.

Playing "21" With Narcotics Enforcement: A Response To Professor Carrington (Symposium, Regulatory Future Of Contingent Employment), Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

Although I have fundamental disagreements with Professor Carrington even when his argument is reduced to its core, my purpose here is neither to defend every jot and tittle of national drug policy, nor to propose any sweeping personal vision of the place of recreational drugs in America. My ambitions are more modest. I suggest three premises: (1) Intelligent discussion of drug policy requires that we shed the image of law enforcement as warfare. (2) Instead, criminal narcotics prohibitions, penalties, and enforcement methods should be analyzed by the same standards which *939 govern any other type of crime. (3) If antinarcotics …

How Reasonable Is The Reasonable Man?: Police And Excessive Force, Geoffrey P. Alpert, William C. Smith

Faculty Publications

The authority of the police to use force represents one of the most misunderstood powers granted to representatives of government. Police officers are authorized to use both psychological and physical force to apprehend criminals and solve crimes. This Article focuses on issues of physical force. After a brief introduction and a review of current legal issues in the use of force, the Article discusses "reasonableness" and the unrealistic expectation which is placed on police to understand, interpret, and follow vague "reasonableness" guidelines. Until the expectations and limitations on the use of force are clarified, in behavioral terms, police officers will …

Policing Hot Pursuits: The Discovery Of Aleatory Elements, Geoffrey P. Alpert, Roger G. Dunham

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Miranda Decision Revisited: Did It Give Criminals Too Many Rights?, Paul Marcus, Stephen J. Markman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Neighborhood Differences In Attitudes Toward Policing: Evidence For A Mixed-Strategy Model Of Policing In A Multi-Ethnic Setting, Roger G. Dunham, Geoffrey P. Alpert

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Excessive Force, R. Wilson Freyermuth

Faculty Publications

Each year claimants file thousands of section 1983 actions against law enforcement or prison officials. Many of these claimants allege that officials used excessive force against them in violation of their constitutional rights. Despite the large number of excessive force cases in the federal courts, however, the Supreme Court has decided only two excessive force cases brought under section 1983. In Whitley v. Albers, the Court elaborated the appropriate standard for determining whether the shooting of a prisoner violated the eighth amendment. In Tennessee v. Garner, the Court applied the fourth amendment to strike down a Tennessee statute that authorized …

Inverse Liability Of The State Of Wisconsin For A De Facto "Temporary Taking" As A Result Of An Administrative Decision: Zinn V. State, Alemante G. Selassie

Faculty Publications

This Note examines Zinn v. State, a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision, which held that plaintiff stated a claim for inverse condemnation against the State of Wisconsin when, as a result of an erroneous quasi-judicial decision by the DNR, plaintiff lost the use of her property for a little longer than a month. This Note takes the position that Zinn represents the growing tendency among courts to enlarge the scope of fact situations in which they will find a taking. Given this tendency, and given that the substantive test in Wisconsin of what constitutes a taking is identical whether a taking …

Constitutional Law - The Eighth Amendment And Prison Reform, Ronald H. Rosenberg

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.