Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 30
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
Divided Court Issues Bright-Line Ruling On Fourth Amendment Seizures, Jeffrey Bellin
Divided Court Issues Bright-Line Ruling On Fourth Amendment Seizures, Jeffrey Bellin
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
This essay posits that Justice Sotomayor is the Court’s chief defender of the Fourth Amendment and the cherished values it protects. She has consistently defended Fourth Amendment freedoms—in majority, concurring, and especially in dissenting opinions. Part I recounts a few of her majority opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. Part II examines her concurring opinion in United States v. Jones. Part III examines several of her dissenting opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. A review of these opinions demonstrates what should be clear to any observer of the Supreme Court: Justice Sotomayor consistently defends Fourth Amendment principles and values.
Case Preview: When Is A Fleeing Suspect “Seized”?, Jeffrey Bellin
Case Preview: When Is A Fleeing Suspect “Seized”?, Jeffrey Bellin
Popular Media
The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable “searches” and “seizures.” On Wednesday, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral argument in Torres v. Madrid, a case that will provide important guidance on what constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure. Here’s a rundown of the case starting with the relevant facts and procedural history, followed by a discussion of the legal issues and finally a couple of things to watch for at the argument.
Lawful Searches Incident To Unlawful Arrests: A Reform Proposal, Mark A. Summers
Lawful Searches Incident To Unlawful Arrests: A Reform Proposal, Mark A. Summers
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Harmless Constitutional Error: How A Minor Doctrine Meant To Improve Judicial Efficiency Is Eroding America's Founding Ideals, Ross C. Reggio
Harmless Constitutional Error: How A Minor Doctrine Meant To Improve Judicial Efficiency Is Eroding America's Founding Ideals, Ross C. Reggio
CMC Senior Theses
The United States Constitution had been in existence for almost two hundred years before the Supreme Court decided that some violations of constitutional rights may be too insignificant to warrant remedial action. Known as "harmless error," this statutory doctrine allows a court to affirm a conviction when a mere technicality or minor defect did not affect the defendant's substantial rights. The doctrine aims to promote judicial efficiency and judgment finality. The Court first applied harmless error to constitutional violations by shifting the statutory test away from the error's effect on substantial rights to its impact on the jury's verdict. Over …
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang L. Ngov
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang L. Ngov
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Fourth Amendment Remedies As Rights: The Warrant Requirement, David Gray
Fourth Amendment Remedies As Rights: The Warrant Requirement, David Gray
David C. Gray
The constitutional status of the warrant requirement is hotly debated. Critics argue that neither the text nor history of the Fourth Amendment support a warrant requirement. Also questioned is the warrant requirement’s ability to protect Fourth Amendment interests. Perhaps in response to these concerns, the Court has steadily degraded the warrant requirement through a series of widening exceptions. The result is an unsatisfying jurisprudence that fails on both conceptual and practical grounds.
These debates have gained new salience with the emergence of modern surveillance technologies such as stingrays, GPS tracking, drones, and Big Data. Although a majority of the Court …
When The Police Get The Law Wrong: How Heien V. North Carolina Further Erodes The Fourth Amendment, Vivan M. Rivera
When The Police Get The Law Wrong: How Heien V. North Carolina Further Erodes The Fourth Amendment, Vivan M. Rivera
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Dangerous Dicta, David Gray
Dangerous Dicta, David Gray
David C. Gray
In United States v. Heller, the Court held that individuals have a Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms apart from their associations with state militias. Although that holding was and remains controversial, less attention has been paid to what the Heller Court had to say about the Fourth Amendment. Writing for the Court in Heller, Justice Scalia asserts that the phrase “right of the people” in the Fourth Amendment “unambiguously refers to individual rights, not ‘collective’ rights or rights that may only be exercised through participation in some corporate body.” By any definition, this is dicta. It is …
Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind
Criminal Innovation And The Warrant Requirement: Reconsidering The Rights-Police Efficiency Trade-Off, Tonja Jacobi, Jonah Kind
William & Mary Law Review
It is routinely assumed that there is a trade-off between police efficiency and the warrant requirement. But existing analysis ignores the interaction between law-enforcement investigative practices and criminal innovation. Narrowing the definition of a search or otherwise limiting the requirement for a warrant gives criminals greater incentive to innovate to avoid detection. With limited resources to develop countermeasures, law enforcement officers will often be just as effective at capturing criminals when facing higher Fourth Amendment hurdles. We provide a game-theoretic model that shows that when law-enforcement investigation and criminal innovation are considered in a dynamic context, the police efficiency rationale …
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
The Conversational Consent Search: How “Quick Look” And Other Similar Searches Have Eroded Our Constitutional Rights, Alexander A. Mikhalevsky
Georgia State University Law Review
One area in which law enforcement agencies have stretched constitutional limits concerns the scope of a suspect’s consent to search his or her vehicle. Police forces across the country have tested the limits of consent by asking vague, conversational questions to suspects with the goal of obtaining a suspect’s consent to search, even though that individual may not want to allow the search or may not know that he or she has the right to deny consent.
Conversational phrases like “Can I take a quick look?” or “Can I take a quick look around?” have “emerg[ed] as . . . …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
Eavesdropping Under New York And Federal Law: How New York Is Departing From Long-Standing Interpretations Mirroring Federal Law - People V. Rabb, Bailey Ince
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Vehicle Checkpoints: The Ever-Expanding Array Of Purposes For Which A Vehicle May Be Stopped - People V. Gavenda, Jan Lucas
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Roving Border Patrols In New York – Sometimes The Drug Smuggler Does Not Get Convicted: The Legal Limitations Regarding Vehicle Stops And Consent Searches Based Upon Reasonable Suspicion - People V. Banisadr, Robert Mitchell
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Search And Seizure: New York Vs. Federal Approach - People V. Keita, Tillie S. Mirman
Search And Seizure: New York Vs. Federal Approach - People V. Keita, Tillie S. Mirman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Constable Blunders But Isnt Punished Does Hudson V Michigans Abolition Of The Exclusionary Rule Extend Beyond Knockandannounce Violations, Mark A. Summers
The Constable Blunders But Isnt Punished Does Hudson V Michigans Abolition Of The Exclusionary Rule Extend Beyond Knockandannounce Violations, Mark A. Summers
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Continuing The March Toward Reasonableness: Last Term's Fourth Amendment Decisions, Lawrence Rosenthal
Continuing The March Toward Reasonableness: Last Term's Fourth Amendment Decisions, Lawrence Rosenthal
Lawrence Rosenthal
No abstract provided.
Coast Guard Boardings Of Suspected Drug Smuggling Vessels On The High Seas And The Fourth Amendment: United States V. Streifel, Roger A. Stetter
Coast Guard Boardings Of Suspected Drug Smuggling Vessels On The High Seas And The Fourth Amendment: United States V. Streifel, Roger A. Stetter
Cardozo Law Review
Report and Recommendation to the New York State Bar Association by the Committee on Federal Constitution
Smith V. Maryland, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Criminal Procedure - Due Process Is Not Violated When Prosecutor Carries Out Threat To Bring Increased Charges After Defendant Refuses To Plead Guilty During Plea Bargaining Session, Catherine N. Jasons
Criminal Procedure - Due Process Is Not Violated When Prosecutor Carries Out Threat To Bring Increased Charges After Defendant Refuses To Plead Guilty During Plea Bargaining Session, Catherine N. Jasons
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law - Fourth Amendment - A Witness May Not Invoke The Exclusionary Rule To Suppress Evidence Before The Grand Jury Or As A Basis For Refusing To Answer Questions Based On Evidence Seized In Violation Of His Fourth Amendment Rights, Leland G. Ripley
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law - Fourth Amendment - Conduct Of An Effective Foreign Policy Demands That Presidential Power To Conduct Electronic Surveillance For Foreign Affaris Purposes Not Be Subjected To Warrant Requirement, And That Subsequent Judicial Review Be Limited, Mark R. Cuker
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
Almeida-Sanchez V. United States, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Almeida-Sanchez V. United States, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Schneckloth V. Bustamonte, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Schneckloth V. Bustamonte, Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Supreme Court Case Files
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law - Search And Seizure - Evidence Obtained By Unreasonable Search And Seizure Is Constitutionally Inadmissible In State Criminal Prosecutions, John B. Lieberman Iii
Constitutional Law - Search And Seizure - Evidence Obtained By Unreasonable Search And Seizure Is Constitutionally Inadmissible In State Criminal Prosecutions, John B. Lieberman Iii
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.