Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law

Criminal Procedure

Seizure

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Cloudy With A Chance Of Government Intrusion: The Third-Party Doctrine In The 21st Century, Steven Arango Mar 2021

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 …


The Private Search Doctrine And The Evolution Of Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence In The Face Of New Technology: A Broad Or Narrow Exception?, Adam A. Bereston Mar 2017

The Private Search Doctrine And The Evolution Of Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence In The Face Of New Technology: A Broad Or Narrow Exception?, Adam A. Bereston

Catholic University Law Review

The advent of new technology has presented courts with unique challenges when analyzing searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment. Out of necessity, the application of the Fourth Amendment has evolved to address privacy issues stemming from modern technology that could not have been anticipated by the Amendment’s drafters. As part of this evolution, the Supreme Court devised the “private search” doctrine, which upholds the constitutionality of warrantless police searches of items that were previously searched by a private party, so long as the police search does not exceed the scope of the private-party search. However, courts have struggled to …


State V. Brossart: Adapting The Fourth Amendment For A Future With Drones, Thomas Bryan Jun 2014

State V. Brossart: Adapting The Fourth Amendment For A Future With Drones, Thomas Bryan

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.


“The Lady Of The House” Vs. A Man With A Gun: Applying Kyllo To Gun-Scanning Technology, Sean K. Driscoll Jan 2013

“The Lady Of The House” Vs. A Man With A Gun: Applying Kyllo To Gun-Scanning Technology, Sean K. Driscoll

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Katz On A Hot Tin Roof: Saving The Fourth Amendment From Commercial Conditioning By Reviving Voluntariness In Disclosures To Third Parties, Mary Graw Leary Jan 2013

Katz On A Hot Tin Roof: Saving The Fourth Amendment From Commercial Conditioning By Reviving Voluntariness In Disclosures To Third Parties, Mary Graw Leary

Scholarly Articles

In a world in which Americans are tracked on the Internet, tracked through their cell phones, tracked through the apps they purchase, and monitored by hundreds of traffic cameras, privacy is quickly becoming nothing more than a quaint vestige of the past.

In a previous article discussing the intersection of technology and the Fourth Amendment, I proposed reframing the issue away from conventional commentary. The Missed Opportunity of United States v. Jones: Commercial Erosion of Fourth Amendment Protection in a Post-Google Earth World, 15 PENN. J. CON. L. 331, 333 (2012). That article posits that society has reached the point …


The Missed Opportunity Of United States V. Jones: Commercial Erosion Of Fourth Amendment Protection In A Post Google Earth World, Mary Graw Leary Jan 2012

The Missed Opportunity Of United States V. Jones: Commercial Erosion Of Fourth Amendment Protection In A Post Google Earth World, Mary Graw Leary

Scholarly Articles

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. These protections, therefore, are only triggered when the government engages is a “search” or “seizure.” For decades, the Court defined “search” as a government examination of an area where one has a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Such an expectation requires both that the individual demonstrate a subjective expectation of privacy and that the expectation is one society finds reasonable. In 1974, Anthony Amsterdam prophesized the unworkability of this test, warning of a day that the government would circumvent it my merely announcing 24 hour surveillance. Similarly, the …