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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 10 of 10

Full-Text Articles in Law

Katz V. United States: Back To The Future?, Michael Vitiello Jan 2018

Katz V. United States: Back To The Future?, Michael Vitiello

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Preventing An Air Panopticon: A Proposal For Reasonable Legal Restrictions On Aerial Surveillance, Jake Laperruque Mar 2017

Preventing An Air Panopticon: A Proposal For Reasonable Legal Restrictions On Aerial Surveillance, Jake Laperruque

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


The 2016 Amendments To Criminal Rule 41: National Search Warrants To Seize Cyberspace, "Particularly" Speaking, Devin M. Adams Mar 2017

The 2016 Amendments To Criminal Rule 41: National Search Warrants To Seize Cyberspace, "Particularly" Speaking, Devin M. Adams

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Digital Technology And Analog Law: Cellular Location Data, The Third-Party Doctrine, And The Law's Need To Evolve, Justin Hill Mar 2017

Digital Technology And Analog Law: Cellular Location Data, The Third-Party Doctrine, And The Law's Need To Evolve, Justin Hill

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Criminal Law And Procedure, Aaron J. Campbell Nov 2016

Criminal Law And Procedure, Aaron J. Campbell

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Anatomy Of A Search: Intrusiveness And The Fourth Amendment, Renée Mcdonald Hutchins May 2010

The Anatomy Of A Search: Intrusiveness And The Fourth Amendment, Renée Mcdonald Hutchins

University of Richmond Law Review

In this essay, I contend that when evaluating the constitutionality of enhanced surveillance devices, the existing test for assessing the occurrence of a Fourth Amendment search should be modified. Specifically, I suggest that intrusiveness should be unambiguously adopted by the Court as the benchmark for assessing and defining the existence of a search under the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, intrusiveness should be clearly defined to require an examination of two factors: the functionality of a challenged form of surveillance and the potential for disclosure created by the device.


Criminal Law, Marla Graff Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough Nov 2003

Criminal Law, Marla Graff Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Criminal Law And Procedure, Julie E. Mcconnell, Gregory Franklin, Craig Winston Stallard Nov 2002

Criminal Law And Procedure, Julie E. Mcconnell, Gregory Franklin, Craig Winston Stallard

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.


Arizona V. Evans: Adapting The Exculsionary Rule To Advancing Computer Technology, C. Maureen Stinger Jan 1996

Arizona V. Evans: Adapting The Exculsionary Rule To Advancing Computer Technology, C. Maureen Stinger

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protects people from illegal search and seizure: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The exclusion of evidence obtained from such an illegal search, known as the exclusionary rule, is purported to sanction unconstitutional police conduct by prohibiting illegally seized evidence from being admitted into court. The …


Self Incrimination And Cryptographic Keys, Greg S. Sergienko Jan 1996

Self Incrimination And Cryptographic Keys, Greg S. Sergienko

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

The Fifth Amendment commands that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." However, extending current judicial interpretations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments too far may allow the government easy access even to private documents, making one's diary and other documents accessible and admissible in court against their author. What the Court has taken away, technology has given. Modern cryptography can make it virtually impossible to decipher documents without the cryptographic key, thus making the availability of the contents of those documents depend on the availability of the key. This article examines …