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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

John Fitisemanu, Et. Al. V. United States Of America, Et. Al., And The American Samoa Government And The Hon. Aumua Amata, Rafael Cox Alomar May 2020

John Fitisemanu, Et. Al. V. United States Of America, Et. Al., And The American Samoa Government And The Hon. Aumua Amata, Rafael Cox Alomar

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.


Financial Oversight And Management Board For Puerto Rico V. Aurelius Investment, Llc, Rafael Cox Alomar Aug 2019

Financial Oversight And Management Board For Puerto Rico V. Aurelius Investment, Llc, Rafael Cox Alomar

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.


John Fitisemanu, Et. Al. V. United States Of America, Et. Al., Rafael Cox Alomar Apr 2018

John Fitisemanu, Et. Al. V. United States Of America, Et. Al., Rafael Cox Alomar

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.


Mirandizing Terrorism Suspects? The Public Safety Exception, The Rescue Doctrine, And Implicit Analogies To Self-Defense, Defense Of Others, And Battered Woman Syndrome, Bruce Ching Jan 2015

Mirandizing Terrorism Suspects? The Public Safety Exception, The Rescue Doctrine, And Implicit Analogies To Self-Defense, Defense Of Others, And Battered Woman Syndrome, Bruce Ching

Journal Articles

This article argues that in creating the public safety exception to the Miranda requirements, the Supreme Court implicitly analogized to the criminal law doctrines of self-defense and defense of others. Thus, examining the justifications of self-defense and defense of others can be useful in determining the contours of the public safety exception and the related "rescue doctrine" exception. In particular, the battered woman syndrome -- which is recognized in a majority of the states and has been successfully invoked by defendants in some self-defense cases -- could provide a conceptual analogue for arguments about whether law enforcement officers were faced …


When Enough Is Enough: Location Tracking, Machine Learning And The Mosaic Theory, Renee Mcdonald Hutchins, Steve Bellovin, Tony Jebara, Sebastian Zimmeck Jan 2014

When Enough Is Enough: Location Tracking, Machine Learning And The Mosaic Theory, Renee Mcdonald Hutchins, Steve Bellovin, Tony Jebara, Sebastian Zimmeck

Journal Articles

Since 1967, when it decided Katz v. United States, the Supreme Court has tied the right to be free of unwanted government scrutiny to the concept of reasonable expectations of privacy.1 An evaluation of reasonable expectations depends, among other factors, upon an assessment of the intrusiveness of government action. When making such assessment historically the Court considered police conduct with clear temporal, geographic, or substantive limits. However, in an era where new technologies permit the storage and compilation of vast amounts of personal data, things are becoming more complicated. A school of thought known as “mosaic theory” has stepped into …


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

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

Journal Articles

For more than two months beginning in late December of 2005, police officers in New York State continuously monitored the location and movements of Scott Weaver's van using a surreptitiously attached global positioning system ("GPS") device, known as a "Qball."' The reason Weaver was targeted for police surveillance has never been disclosed. 2 In addition, law enforcement made no attempt to justify the heightened scrutiny of Weaver by seeking the pre-authorization of a warrant from a neutral magistrate.3 Rather, for sixty-five days, the police subjected Weaver to intense surveillance without oversight, interruption, or explanation. 4 More than a year after …


Tied Up In Knotts? Gps And The Fourth Amendment, Renee Mcdonald Hutchins Jan 2007

Tied Up In Knotts? Gps And The Fourth Amendment, Renee Mcdonald Hutchins

Journal Articles

Judicial and scholarly assessment of emerging technology seems poised to drive the Fourth Amendment down one of three paths. The first would simply relegate the amendment to a footnote in history books by limiting its reach to harms that the framers specifically envisioned. A modified version of this first approach would dispense with expansive constitutional notions of privacy and replace them with legislative fixes. A third path offers the amendment continued vitality but requires the U.S. Supreme Court to overhaul its Fourth Amendment analysis. Fortunately, a fourth alternative is available to cabin emerging technologies within the existing doctrinal framework. Analysis …