Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Conclude To Exclude: The Exclusionary Rule's Role In Civil Forfeiture Proceedings, Daniel W. Kaminski
Conclude To Exclude: The Exclusionary Rule's Role In Civil Forfeiture Proceedings, Daniel W. Kaminski
Seventh Circuit Review
The United States Supreme Court established the exclusionary rule in order to deter law enforcement officers from conducting illegal searches and seizures. By excluding illegally seized evidence, the Court looked to provide American citizens with a remedy to uphold their Fourth Amendment rights. Traditionally, the exclusionary rule excluded only illegally obtained evidence in criminal proceedings. In One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, however, the Court applied the exclusionary rule to civil forfeiture proceedings because the forfeiture statute was quasi-criminal in nature: like a criminal proceeding, its object was to penalize the commission of an offense.
The forfeiture …
Let's Be Reasonable: Fourth Amendment Principles In The Digital Age, Scott D. Blake
Let's Be Reasonable: Fourth Amendment Principles In The Digital Age, Scott D. Blake
Seventh Circuit Review
The expansion of computers in American society has led to new developments in Fourth Amendment doctrine. Just like every other American, criminals use computers, which requires law enforcement to search and seize computers. Frequently, an executing officer inadvertently discovers computer files with illegal content that are outside the scope of the original warrant. Reasoning that traditional Fourth Amendment doctrine does not provide sufficient protection in a digital age, two federal circuits have crafted alternative approaches that deviate from it. However, the Seventh Circuit, in United States v. Mann, has continued to apply the traditional principles of Fourth Amendment doctrine …