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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Does The End Justify The Means? The Clumsy And Circuitous Logic Of Blood Test Admissibility In Criminal Prosecutions In State V. Cormier, Kyle T. Macdonald Oct 2017

Does The End Justify The Means? The Clumsy And Circuitous Logic Of Blood Test Admissibility In Criminal Prosecutions In State V. Cormier, Kyle T. Macdonald

Maine Law Review

In State v. Cormier, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, was asked to determine whether a Maine statute requiring law enforcement officers to test the blood of all drivers for intoxicants following a fatal motor vehicle collision violates the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution when the operation of the statute allows for the admission of those blood test results in a future criminal trial of the driver. In determining that the procedures of title 29-A, section 2522 of the Maine Revised Statutes are not violative of the Fourth Amendment, the Law Court effectively confirmed …


The Supreme Court's Long And Perhaps Unnecessary Struggle To Find A Standard Of Culpability To Regulate The Federal Exclusionary Remedy For Fourth/Fourteenth Amendment Violations, Melvyn H. Zarr Oct 2017

The Supreme Court's Long And Perhaps Unnecessary Struggle To Find A Standard Of Culpability To Regulate The Federal Exclusionary Remedy For Fourth/Fourteenth Amendment Violations, Melvyn H. Zarr

Maine Law Review

On January 14, 2009, the United States Supreme Court decided Herring v. United States. In Herring, the defendant moved to suppress evidence that he alleged was seized as a result of an arrest that violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court approved the decision below to deny suppression of the evidence. The decision set off a flurry of speculation that the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule would not see its 100th birthday in 2014. A headline in the New York Times of January 31 declared: “Supreme Court Edging Closer to Repeal of Evidence Ruling.” Another …


Federal Habeas Review Of State Court Convictions: Incoherent Law But An Essential Right, Lynn Adelman Jul 2017

Federal Habeas Review Of State Court Convictions: Incoherent Law But An Essential Right, Lynn Adelman

Maine Law Review

I thank the editors of the Maine Law Review for the opportunity to participate in a discussion about the present state of post-conviction review of criminal convictions. This discussion is important and timely both because the quality of the procedures by which state prisoners can obtain post-conviction review varies greatly from state to state and because state prisoners who seek federal court review of their constitutional claims by petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus face many obstacles. As a federal district judge, my experience is primarily with the later problem. Thus, in this article, I will offer a few …


Kentucky V. King: A New Approach To Consent-Based Police Encounters?, Jamesa J. Drake Apr 2017

Kentucky V. King: A New Approach To Consent-Based Police Encounters?, Jamesa J. Drake

Maine Law Review

The exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement permits the police to enter a private residence, without prior judicial approval, whenever the police have an objectively reasonable basis for believing that the destruction of evidence is imminent or underway. The United States Supreme Court’s most recent pronouncement in the exigent circumstances realm—Kentucky v. King—is not a case about exigent circumstances per se. Instead, King concerns the “policecreated exigency” doctrine, a concept that the vast majority of federal and state courts already recognize.This doctrine adds a crucial caveat to the exigent circumstances rule, but it is not new. It provides that …