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

Criminal Procedure Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure

Cell Phone Searches In A Digital World: Blurred Lines, New Realities And Fourth Amendment Pluralism, Steven I. Friedland Oct 2013

Cell Phone Searches In A Digital World: Blurred Lines, New Realities And Fourth Amendment Pluralism, Steven I. Friedland

Steven I. Friedland

State and federal courts are split over whether cell phone searches incident to a lawful arrest are permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court has the opportunity to create uniformity by accepting a certiorari petition in a cell phone search incident to arrest case, either United States v. Wurie or Riley v. California. The Court should do so to create an analysis that incorporates sensory enhancing technology, not avoids it, as it has done to date.

The split in case law evidences a central contradiction. Fourth Amendment rules need to be predictable and based on clear guidelines for effective …


Probable Cause On A Leash, Taylor D. Phipps May 2013

Probable Cause On A Leash, Taylor D. Phipps

Taylor D Phipps

This article develops in four parts. Part II of this article explores the historical evolution of Supreme Court caselaw and the Court’s recent decision in Florida v. Harris.[1] This article attempts to enlighten the Court’s standard in Harris by looking to prior caselaw and discusses why courts should interpret the holding in a way that allows defendants to challenge the legitimacy and accuracy of training and certification programs. If applied incorrectly, Harris will violate the Fourth Amendment and allow searches to occur on less than probable cause. Part III reviews the fallibility of drug detection dogs and the diversity …


Contextual Expectations Of Privacy, Andrew Selbst Feb 2013

Contextual Expectations Of Privacy, Andrew Selbst

Andrew Selbst

Fourth Amendment search jurisprudence is nominally based on a “reasonable expectation of privacy,” but actual doctrine is detached from society’s conception of privacy. Courts rely on various binary distinctions: Is a piece of information secret or not? Was the observed conduct inside or outside? While often convenient, none of these binary distinctions can adequately capture the complicated range of ideas encompassed by “privacy.” Privacy theorists have begun to understand that a consideration of social context is essential to a full understanding of privacy. Helen Nissenbaum’s theory of contextual integrity, which characterizes a right to privacy as the preservation of expected …