Law Commons^™

Community Caretaking Exception Saves Lives . . . The Supreme Court Disagrees, Gabriella Lorenzo

Touro Law Review

As many are aware, the Fourth Amendment protects the people against unreasonable searches and seizures. A warrant is necessary for said activities. While there are a few exceptions to the warrant requirement, the Supreme Court recently held that the community caretaking exception does not extend to the home. Extending this exception to the home would allow police officers to enter and engage in functions that are unrelated to the investigation of a crime. Essentially, this exception would allow police to aid individuals and prevent serious, dangerous situations to protect the community. This Note discusses why the Supreme Court erred in …

Constitutional Law—Fourth Amendment: Without Your Clothes, The Fourth Amendment Goes, Courtney Murray

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Discussing Privacy In Sec Subpoena Practice After Carpenter V. United States, William A. Ballentine

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Aspek Hukum Atas Penerbitan Waran Tanpa Hak Memesan Efek Terlebih Dahulu Sebagai Cara Pembayaran Utang Emiten Pasar Modal Indonesia, Arfan Noer Azwad

"Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI

In order to debt restructuring activities, a public company may be able to utilize various capital market instruments deemed to be most appropriate to the circumstances of public companies or issuers. One of them is by selling the equity securities either selling stocks, converting bonds in the settlement of debt restructuring, and / or issuing warrants.Warrants issued as part of a restructuring scheme of the Capital Market Issuers in debt repayments certainly have legal risks which certainly have an impact on shareholders, or on creditors.

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 …

Extent Of The Sufficiency Of The Legal Guarantees For The Protection Of The Insured Against The Condition Of The Forfeiture Of The Right For The Warrant Prescribed In The Insurance Policy Under The Jordanian Legislation; A Comparative Study, Nabeel Al Shatanawi, Jamal Talal Al-Naimi

UAEU Law Journal

Due to the lack of legislative provision in the Jordanian Civil Law about the penalty stipulated as a result of the breach in the commitment to notify about the occurrence of the risk, it has been a well-established practice within the Insurance company not to be sufficed by the general rules of penalties. Thus, this paragraph was added to the insurance policy, whether or not related to a legal commitment or through agreement, a penalty concerning the violation if notifying about the risk occurrence, that the right of the insured in the insurance amount is forfeited, in spite of the …

Gps Tracking At The Border: A Mistaken Expectation Or A Chilling Reality, Kimberly Shi

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

In 2018, Matthew C. Allen, the Assistant Director for the Domestic Operations Division within the United States Department of Homeland Security, filed a declaration in United States v. Ignjatov describing a departmental policy allowing for the installation of a “GPS tracking device on a vehicle at the United States border without a warrant or individualized suspicion,” limited “to 48 hours.” While the Border Search Doctrine, which predates the Fourth Amendment, deems that no warrant is necessary at the border for most searches and seizures because of the government’s inherent power to control who or what comes within a nation’s borders, …

Please Stop: The Law Court's Recent Roadblock Decisions, Jonathan A. Block

Maine Law Review

Police checkpoints or “roadblocks” have become an increasingly utilized law enforcement tool. At best, these checkpoints result in only a minor inconvenience to motorists. When abused, however, roadblocks have the potential for invidious invasions of privacy and personal freedom. Roadblocks are designed to deter, and to a lesser extent detect, criminal activity by stopping everyone—both the guilty and the law-abiding—for a brief inspection, thereby impinging to some degree on one's freedom of travel, privacy, and “right to be let alone.” Such “seizures” must be “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment in order to survive constitutional challenge. The major difference between roadblocks …

A New Era: Digital Curtilage And Alexa-Enabled Smart Home Devices, Johanna Sanchez

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

In General Public Use: An Unnecessary Test In Fourth Amendment Searches Using Advanced Sensing Technology, Mike Petridis

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

To Knock Or Not To Knock? No-Knock Warrants And Confrontational Policing, Brian Dolan

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note proceeds in three parts. Part I begins by explaining what no-knock warrants are and why they are used. Part I then addresses recent state legislative efforts to reform no-knock warrant use and argues that these efforts, however well-intentioned, are insufficient. Part I will also provide a brief history of how no-knock warrant use developed and gives an overview of the current status of state law regarding no-knock warrants. Part II argues that, contrary to the arguments of no-knock proponents, elimination of no-knock warrants and strict adherence to the knock-and-announce requirement is a more effective way to ensure …

Cell Phones Are Orwell's Telescreen: The Need For Fourth Amendment Protection In Real-Time Cell Phone Location Information, Matthew Devoy Jones

Cleveland State Law Review

Courts are divided as to whether law enforcement can collect cell phone location information in real-time without a warrant under the Fourth Amendment. This Article argues that Carpenter v. United States requires a warrant under the Fourth Amendment prior to law enforcement’s collection of real-time cell phone location information. Courts that have required a warrant prior to the government’s collection of real-time cell phone location information have considered the length of surveillance. This should not be a factor. The growing prevalence and usage of cell phones and cell phone technology, the original intent of the Fourth Amendment, and United States …

Nowhere To Run, Nowhere To Hide.* Applying The Fourth Amendment To Connected Cars In The Internet-Of-Things Era, Gregory C. Brown, Jr.

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

Part I of this Note will briefly discuss the key components of a Connected Car, identify who collects the data from the Car, and examine the various uses for the data. Part I also explores whether Car owners consent to the collection of their Car’s data. Part II-A will trace the historical development of the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, which generally permits law-enforcement officers to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle. Part II-B will discuss how the Supreme Court has applied the Fourth Amendment to pre-Internet technologies. Part II-C will discuss two recent Fourth Amendment Supreme …

Implications Of The Private Search Doctrine In A Digital Age: Advocating For Limitations On Warrantless Searches Through Adoption Of The Virtual File Approach, Brianna M. Espeland

Idaho Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Ammons, Rebecca Ruffer

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Hill, Nazariy Gavrysh

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Privacy Vs. Protection: Why Tracking Mobile-Device Location Data Without A Warrant Requires A Fourth Amendment Exception, Andrew Stover

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.

The Prolonged Arm Of The Law: Fourth Amendment Principles, The Maynard Decision, And The Need For A New Warrant For Electronic Tracking, R. Reeve Wood Iii

Maine Law Review

This article examines the decision in United States v. Maynard as well as the simultaneous emergence of a vocal set of magistrate judges advocating for Fourth Amendment protection for cell phone location information. It argues that, even if the Maynard rationale is widely adopted and the use of tracking devices is found to be a search, the Fourth Amendment principles of specificity and limited discretion on the part of government officers mean that the warrant frameworks currently in use will not provide adequate protection from the threat of government officers obtaining information for which they have not demonstrated a need. …

The Outer Limits: Imsi-Catchers, Technology, And The Future Of The Fourth Amendment, Ryan C. Chapman

Pepperdine Law Review

Recent advances in technology are posing new challenges for a legal system based on decades-old precedent. Nowhere is this more apparent than in law enforcement’s warrantless use of IMSI Catchers. These devices mimic a cell phone tower, and when the device is activated, cell phones will naturally connect to them. Law enforcement officers can use those intercepted cell phone signals to track a suspect’s movements in real time with startling accuracy. Scholarly commentary on these devices has largely concluded that their use requires a warrant. This Comment engages in a close examination of Fourth Amendment precedent and argues that, as …

It’S Probable: Missouri Constitution Article I, Section 15 Requires A Higher Standard To Obtain A Warrant For Real-Time Or Prospective Csli, Aaron Hadlow

Missouri Law Review

The scope of this Note primarily deals with issues surrounding real-time CSLI, although the issues implicated by article I, section 15 of the Missouri Constitution could apply to historic CSLI as well. Part II of this Note discusses general principles of Fourth Amendment law and the Supreme Court’s treatment of searches and seizures in relation to electronic communications and data. It then discusses the statutory developments empowering law enforcement to use emerging technologies for surveillance purposes. Part III discusses recent developments in search and seizure law. It then discusses Missouri’s recent amendment to its constitution, which provides additional protections for …

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.

Game Of Phones: The Fourth Amendment Implications Of Real-Time Cell Phone Tracking, Cal Cumpstone

Cleveland State Law Review

With the help of technological advancements, law enforcement can now hijack a targeted individual’s cell phone to ping and track the phone’s exact location in real time. Based upon previous rulings, this new tracking process has apparently fallen into a "grey area" of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. However, real-time cell phone tracking should be a search in terms of the Fourth Amendment and, therefore, require a warrant. Real-time cell phone tracking infringes on an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy, violates the trespass doctrine as a trespass to chattels, and violates the Kyllo standard by using technology not in general public use …

Riley And Abandonment: Expanding Fourth Amendment Protection Of Cell Phones, Abigail Hoverman

Northwestern University Law Review

In light of the privacy concerns inherent to personal technological devices, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in 2014 recognizing the need for categorical heightened protection of cell phones during searches incident to arrest in Riley v. California. This Note argues for expansion of heightened protections for cell phones in the context of abandoned evidence because the same privacy concerns apply. This argument matters because state and federal courts have not provided the needed protection to abandoned cell phones pre- or post-Riley.

The Fourth Amendment And Driving While Intoxicated: When Does A Police Officer Need A Warrant ?, Marra Kassman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beware The Friends You Keep And The Places You Sleep: The Fourth Amendments Limited Protection Over Visitors And Their Belongings, Alysha C. Preston

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note concludes that the Arizona Supreme Court correctly applied the possession test and strongly urges the Supreme Court to address the issue and follow in Arizona’s footsteps. The possession test not only provides the best guidance for both officers and courts, but also provides the most precision and clarity. More importantly, this approach aligns with current Supreme Court case law and conforms to established Fourth Amendment principles. Holding otherwise would gravely undermine policy, disregard current precedents, and undervalue the sole purpose for the Fourth Amendment’s existence: to protect one’s reasonable expectation of privacy. Part I examines the scope …

Supreme Court's 1998-1999 Term: Fourth Amendment Decisions, Kathryn R. Urbonya

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Hijacked At The Border: Why The Government Should Have Reasonable Suspicion Before Conducting Intrusive Examinations Of Our Personal Electronic Devices, Ryne Spengler

Seton Hall Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

Two Wrongs Don't Make A Fourth Amendment Right: Samson Court Errs In Choosing Proper Analytical Framework, Errs In Result, Parolees Lose Fourth Amendment Protection, Rachael A. Lynch

Akron Law Review

This Note will follow the Fourth Amendment from its origins to its modern application to parolee rights, as evidenced by the Samson Court. Part II focuses on the Fourth Amendment, from the circumstances surrounding its adoption to modern court cases that have applied its tenets to prisoners, probationers, and, finally, parolees. Part III details the Supreme Court’s decision in Samson v. California, including a thorough discussion of the facts that gave rise to the case and lower court decisions. Part IV explores the problems with the Court’s framework and suggests other possible frameworks the Court could have used to come …

Constitutional Law – Warrantless Searches – Whether The Search Incident To Arrest Exception Should Apply To Data Stored On Cellular Phones, Jeremy Ray

Tennessee Journal of Race, Gender, & Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Storming The Castle: Fernandez V. California And The Waning Warrant Requirement, Joshua Bornstein

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.