Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Selected Works (13)
- Penn State Law (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (2)
- Pace University (1)
-
- Pepperdine University (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- The University of Maine (1)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (1)
- UIC School of Law (1)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (1)
- University of Michigan Law School (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- University of the Pacific (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- William & Mary Law School (1)
- Keyword
-
- Fourth Amendment (15)
- Fourth amendment (8)
- Search (8)
- Privacy (6)
- Constitutional Law (5)
-
- Jurisprudence (4)
- Law and Society (4)
- Privacy; Surveillance; United States v. Jones (4)
- Criminal Law (3)
- Criminal procedure (3)
- Location tracking (3)
- Seizure (3)
- United States v. Jones (3)
- Constitution (2)
- Constitutional law (2)
- Exclusionary Rule (2)
- Exclusionary rule (2)
- Expectation of privacy (2)
- Gps tracking (2)
- Human Rights Law (2)
- Information privacy (2)
- Katz (2)
- Location surveillance (2)
- Privacy; Surveillance; Fourth Amendment; United States v. Jones (2)
- Probable Cause (2)
- Right to counsel (2)
- Search and seizure (2)
- Sixth Amendment (2)
- Stop and frisk (2)
- Surveillance (2)
- Publication
-
- Stephen E Henderson (6)
- Danielle Keats Citron (2)
- David C. Gray (2)
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
-
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- Susan Freiwald (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Catholic University Law Review (1)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (1)
- Florida Law Review (1)
- Honors College (1)
- Jason Forcier (1)
- McGeorge Law Review (1)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (1)
- Pace Law Review (1)
- Pepperdine Law Review (1)
- Scholarly Articles (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- UIC Law Review (1)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (1)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 32
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
Seizing A Cell Phone Incident To Arrest: Data Extraction Devices, Faraday Bags, Or Aluminum Foil As A Solution To The Warrantless Cell Phone Search Problem, Adam M. Gershowitz
Seizing A Cell Phone Incident To Arrest: Data Extraction Devices, Faraday Bags, Or Aluminum Foil As A Solution To The Warrantless Cell Phone Search Problem, Adam M. Gershowitz
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
Who Should Be The ‘Decider’ On Keeping Our Secrets?, Stephen E. Henderson
Who Should Be The ‘Decider’ On Keeping Our Secrets?, Stephen E. Henderson
Stephen E Henderson
It’S Raining Katz And Jones: The Implications Of United States V. Jones–A Case Of Sound And Fury, Jace C. Gatewood
It’S Raining Katz And Jones: The Implications Of United States V. Jones–A Case Of Sound And Fury, Jace C. Gatewood
Pace Law Review
This Article discusses the implications of Jones in light of emerging technology capable of duplicating the monitoring undertaken in Jones with the same degree of intrusiveness attributable to GPS tracking devices, but without depending on any physical invasion of property. This Article also discusses how the pervasive use of this emerging technology may reshape reasonable expectations of privacy concerning an individual’s public movements, making it all the more difficult to apply the Fourth Amendment constitutional tests outlined in Jones. In this regard, this Article explores recent trends in electronic tracking, surveillance, and other investigative methods that have raised privacy concerns, …
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Seattle University Law Review
This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …
“Lonesome Road”: Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz
“Lonesome Road”: Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz
Seattle University Law Review
The protections of the Fourth Amendment on the streets and highways of America have been drastically curtailed. This Article traces the debasement of Fourth Amendment protections on the road and how the Fourth Amendment’s core value of preventing arbitrary police behavior has been marginalized. This Article contends that the existence of a traffic offense should not be the end of the inquiry but the first step, and that defendants should be able to challenge the reasonableness even when there is proof of a traffic offense.
Safe To Drive? Police Powers Of Search And Seizure In The Vehicular Context, Mark Rucci
Safe To Drive? Police Powers Of Search And Seizure In The Vehicular Context, Mark Rucci
Honors College
Since their creation, automobiles have become a central facet of the American culture and psyche. As status symbols and modes of transportation their importance cannot be overstated. Americans love their cars, and the average citizen believes that he or she has legitimate privacy interests in his or her vehicle. But is this the case? For decades, The Court has struggled to balance 4th Amendment privacy rights with effective police procedure, and has thus handed down dozens of rulings on the topic, many of which often seem disparate and contradictory. In the face of such confusion, the Court’s answer has almost …
Has Skinner Killed The Katz? Are Society's Expectations Of Privacy Reasonable In Today's Techological World?, Jason Forcier
Has Skinner Killed The Katz? Are Society's Expectations Of Privacy Reasonable In Today's Techological World?, Jason Forcier
Jason Forcier
The right to privacy has and will remain a hotly contested debate about American liberties. In 2012, a 3-0 decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, in United States v. Melvin Skinner, the court held that there is no “reasonable expectation of privacy in the data given off by. . . cellphone[s].” Given today’s explosion of cellular technology and use of smart phones, is it unreasonable to believe a person should remain secure in their "person" and “effects," as guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment, from unreasonable searches and seizures? Furthermore, with police requiring only a subpoena to a obtain …
Amending For Justice’S Sake: Codified Disclosure Rule Needed To Provide Guidance To Prosecutor’S Duty To Disclose, Nathan A. Frazier
Amending For Justice’S Sake: Codified Disclosure Rule Needed To Provide Guidance To Prosecutor’S Duty To Disclose, Nathan A. Frazier
Florida Law Review
"I wouldn’t wish what I am going through on anyone," Senator Ted Stevens commented after losing his seat in the United States Senate on November 18, 2008. Senator Stevens lost the race largely because a criminal conviction damaged his reputation. After Senator Stevens endured months of contentious litigation, the jury convicted the longest serving Republican senator in United States history on seven felony counts of ethics violations. Six months later, the presiding judge, the Honorable Emmet Sullivan, vacated the conviction at the request of Attorney General Eric Holder because of blatant failures to disclose exculpatory evidence. Senator Stevens brings a …
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2007 Term, Susan N. Herman
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2007 Term, Susan N. Herman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Keeping Up With The Jonses: Making Sure Your History Is Just As Wrong As Everyone Else's, Brian Sawers
Keeping Up With The Jonses: Making Sure Your History Is Just As Wrong As Everyone Else's, Brian Sawers
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Before Katz v. United States, a search under the Fourth Amendment required a trespass. If there was no trespass on one’s property, then there was no search. In Katz, a 1967 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court abandoned that approach, instead finding a search without a trespass based on the government’s invasion of a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” In Oliver v. United States, the Court found that trespass was not sufficient to create a search. It found no reasonable expectation of privacy in open fields, and thus no search, even though the defendant had erected “No Trespassing” signs around his property …
New Jersey V. T.L.O.: The Supreme Court Severely Limits Schoolchildrens' Fourth Amendment Rights When Being Searched By Public School Officials, Missy Kelly Bankhead
New Jersey V. T.L.O.: The Supreme Court Severely Limits Schoolchildrens' Fourth Amendment Rights When Being Searched By Public School Officials, Missy Kelly Bankhead
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Smarter Rule For Smarter Phones: Why Sila Does Not Protect Our Smartphones And Why The California Legislature Should, Russell Cooper
A Smarter Rule For Smarter Phones: Why Sila Does Not Protect Our Smartphones And Why The California Legislature Should, Russell Cooper
McGeorge Law Review
No abstract provided.
Neurotechnologies At The Intersection Of Criminal Procedure And Constitutional Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik
Neurotechnologies At The Intersection Of Criminal Procedure And Constitutional Law, Amanda C. Pustilnik
Faculty Scholarship
The rapid development of neurotechnologies poses novel constitutional issues for criminal law and criminal procedure. These technologies can identify directly from brain waves whether a person is familiar with a stimulus like a face or a weapon, can model blood flow in the brain to indicate whether a person is lying, and can even interfere with brain processes themselves via high-powered magnets to cause a person to be less likely to lie to an investigator. These technologies implicate the constitutional privilege against compelled, self-incriminating speech under the Fifth Amendment and the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure …
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
Faculty Scholarship
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In that case, officers used a GPS-enabled device to track a suspect’s public movements for four weeks, amassing a considerable amount of data in the process. Although ultimately resolved on narrow grounds, five Justices joined concurring opinions in Jones expressing sympathy for some version of the “mosaic theory” of Fourth Amendment privacy. This theory holds that we maintain reasonable expectations of privacy in certain quantities of information even if we do not have such expectations in the constituent parts. This Article examines and …
The Dog Days Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports
The Dog Days Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This Article discusses Florida v. Harris and Florida v. Jardines, the two Fourth Amendment drug dog opinions issued by the Supreme Court earlier this year. Together the cases hold that a narcotics detection dog effects a “search” when it intrudes on a constitutionally protected area in order to collect evidence, but that the dog’s positive alert is generally sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. The piece argues that both cases essentially generate a bright-line rule, thereby deviating from precedent that favored a more amorphous standard considering all the surrounding circumstances. Like many purportedly clear rules, the ones …
Culpability, Deterrence, And The Exclusionary Rule, Kit Kinports
Culpability, Deterrence, And The Exclusionary Rule, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This Article discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the concepts of culpability and deterrence in its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, in particular, in the opinions applying the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The contemporary Court sees deterrence as the exclusionary rule’s sole function, and the Article begins by taking the Court at its word, evaluating its exclusionary rule case law on its own terms. Drawing on three different theories of deterrence – economic rational choice theory, organizational theory, and the expressive account of punishment – the Article analyzes the mechanics by which the exclusionary rule deters unconstitutional searches and questions …
Florida V. Jardines: The Wolf At The Castle Door, Timothy C. Macdonnell
Florida V. Jardines: The Wolf At The Castle Door, Timothy C. Macdonnell
Scholarly Articles
The purpose of this article is to examine the controversy regarding the application of the contraband exception to the home and the potential impact of the Florida v. Jardines decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. The article will begin by examining the cases that make up the Supreme Court's contraband exception and some of the Court's precedent regarding the home and warrantless searches. Next, the article will examine the Florida Supreme Court's holding in Jardines and discuss how the Florida court arrived at the conclusion that the canine sniff in that case was a search. This section will compare the …
“The Lady Of The House” Vs. A Man With A Gun: Applying Kyllo To Gun-Scanning Technology, Sean K. Driscoll
“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.
Effective Remedies For Ineffective Assistance, Jenia I. Turner
Effective Remedies For Ineffective Assistance, Jenia I. Turner
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
In two recent cases, Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper, the Supreme Court affirmed that criminal defendants have a right to competent counsel during plea bargaining. The Court also established that the injury caused by ineffective assistance is not mooted by the subsequent conviction of the defendant at trial. The cases were broadly celebrated for clarifying that the Sixth Amendment applies fully to plea bargaining — the standard process by which our justice system resolves criminal cases today.
The most significant and surprising part of Lafler, however, was the Court’s holding concerning remedies. The Court held that trial courts …
Clever Contraband: Why Illinois’ Lockstep With The U.S. Supreme Court Gives Police Authority To Search The Bowels Of Your Vehicle, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 425 (2013), Jason Cooper
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Debate: The Constitutionality Of Stop-And-Frisk In New York City, David Rudovsky, Lawrence Rosenthal
Debate: The Constitutionality Of Stop-And-Frisk In New York City, David Rudovsky, Lawrence Rosenthal
All Faculty Scholarship
Stop-and-frisk, a crime prevention tactic that allows a police officer to stop a person based on “reasonable suspicion” of criminal activity and frisk based on reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous, has been a contentious police practice since first approved by the Supreme Court in 1968. In Floyd v. City of New York, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that New York City’s stop-and-frisk practices violate both the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. Professors David Rudovsky and Lawrence Rosenthal debate the constitutionality of stop-and-frisk in New York City in light of …
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
David C. Gray
We are at the cusp of a historic shift in our conceptions of the Fourth Amendment driven by dramatic advances in surveillance technology. Governments and their private sector agents continue to invest billions of dollars in massive data-mining projects, advanced analytics, fusion centers, and aerial drones, all without serious consideration of the constitutional issues that these technologies raise. In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court signaled an end to its silent acquiescence in this expanding surveillance state. In that case, five justices signed concurring opinions defending a revolutionary proposition: that citizens have Fourth Amendment interests in substantial quantities of …
The Davis Good Faith Rule And Getting Answers To The Questions Jones Left Open, Susan Freiwald
The Davis Good Faith Rule And Getting Answers To The Questions Jones Left Open, Susan Freiwald
Susan Freiwald
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Jones clearly established that use of GPS tracking surveillance constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. But the Court left many other questions unanswered about the nature and scope of the constitutional privacy right in location data. A review of lower court decisions in the wake of Jones reveals that, rather than begin to answer the questions that Jones left open, courts are largely avoiding substantive Fourth Amendment analysis of location data privacy. Instead, they are finding that officers who engaged in GPS tracking and related surveillance operated in good faith, based …
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David Gray, Danielle Citron
David C. Gray
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In that case, officers used a GPS-enabled device to track a suspect’s public movements for four weeks, amassing a considerable amount of data in the process. Although ultimately resolved on narrow grounds, five Justices joined concurring opinions in Jones expressing sympathy for some version of the “mosaic theory” of Fourth Amendment privacy. This theory holds that we maintain reasonable expectations of privacy in certain quantities of information even if we do not have such expectations in the constituent parts. This Article examines and explores …
Reforming Surveillance Law: The Swiss Model., Susan Freiwald, Sylvain Méille
Reforming Surveillance Law: The Swiss Model., Susan Freiwald, Sylvain Méille
Susan Freiwald
As implemented over the past twenty-seven years, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (“ECPA”), which regulates electronic surveillance by law enforcement agents, has become incomplete, confusing, and ineffective. In contrast, a new Swiss law, CrimPC, regulates law enforcement surveillance in a more comprehensive, uniform, and effective manner. This Article compares the two approaches and argues that recent proposals to reform ECPA in a piecemeal fashion will not suffice. Instead, Swiss CrimPC presents a model for more fundamental reform of U.S. law.
This Article is the first to analyze the Swiss law with international eyes and demonstrate its advantages over the U.S. …
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
The Right To Quantitative Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
Danielle Keats Citron
We are at the cusp of a historic shift in our conceptions of the Fourth Amendment driven by dramatic advances in surveillance technology. Governments and their private sector agents continue to invest billions of dollars in massive data-mining projects, advanced analytics, fusion centers, and aerial drones, all without serious consideration of the constitutional issues that these technologies raise. In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court signaled an end to its silent acquiescence in this expanding surveillance state. In that case, five justices signed concurring opinions defending a revolutionary proposition: that citizens have Fourth Amendment interests in substantial quantities of …
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron
Danielle Keats Citron
On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In that case, officers used a GPS-enabled device to track a suspect’s public movements for four weeks, amassing a considerable amount of data in the process. Although ultimately resolved on narrow grounds, five Justices joined concurring opinions in Jones expressing sympathy for some version of the “mosaic theory” of Fourth Amendment privacy. This theory holds that we maintain reasonable expectations of privacy in certain quantities of information even if we do not have such expectations in the constituent parts. This Article examines and explores …
American Bar Association Criminal Justice Standards On Law Enforcement Access To Third Party Records, Stephen E. Henderson
American Bar Association Criminal Justice Standards On Law Enforcement Access To Third Party Records, Stephen E. Henderson
Stephen E Henderson
Search, Seizure, And Immunity: Second-Order Normative Authority And Rights, Stephen E. Henderson, Kelly Sorensen
Search, Seizure, And Immunity: Second-Order Normative Authority And Rights, Stephen E. Henderson, Kelly Sorensen
Stephen E Henderson
A paradigmatic aspect of a paradigmatic kind of right is that the rights holder is the only one who can alienate it. When individuals waive rights, the normative source of that waiving is normally taken to be the individual herself. This moral feature—immunity—is usually in the background of discussions about rights. We bring it into the foreground here, with specific attention to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Kentucky v. King (2011), concerning search and seizure rights. An entailment of the Court’s decision is that, at least in some cases, a right can be removed by the intentional actions of …
Real-Time And Historic Location Surveillance After United States V. Jones: An Administrable, Mildly Mosaic Approach, Stephen E. Henderson
Real-Time And Historic Location Surveillance After United States V. Jones: An Administrable, Mildly Mosaic Approach, Stephen E. Henderson
Stephen E Henderson
In United States v. Jones, the government took an extreme position: so far as the federal Constitution is concerned, law enforcement can surreptitiously electronically track the movements of any American over the course of an entire month without cause or restraint. According to the government, whether the surveillance be for good reason, invidious reason, or no reason, the Fourth Amendment is not implicated. Fortunately, that position was unanimously rejected by the High Court. The Court did not, however, resolve what restriction or restraint the Fourth Amendment places upon location surveillance, reflecting a proper judicial restraint in this nuanced and difficult …