Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Suspicionless Drug Testing And Chandler V. Miller: Is The Supreme Court Making The Right Decisions, Ross H. Parr

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

During the last decade, the United States Supreme Court has rendered four major decisions regarding the validity of suspicionless drug testing policies. Such drug testing policies have become a common way for employers and other interested parties-including the government-both to deter the use of drugs and to determine who is acting under the influence of illegal narcotics. Because government officials often randomly select individuals for drug testing, some of these individuals have charged that a governmental drug testing policy violates the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court found this argument unconvincing in three cases decided between 1989 and 1997, but in …

The Qualitative Dimension Of Fourth Amendment "Reasonableness", Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Supreme Court doctrine protects two seemingly distinct kinds of interests under the heading of privacy rights: one "substantive," the other "procedural." The Fourth Amendment guarantee against "unreasonable searches and seizures" has been generally interpreted to protect procedural privacy. Searches are typically defined as governmental inspections of activities and locations in which an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy from observation. In the typical case, this reasonable expectation of privacy may be breached only where the government has acquired a quantitatively substantial objective basis for believing that the search would uncover evidence of a crime. Substantive privacy rights have not …

"We The People" And Our Enduring Values, Susan Bandes

Michigan Law Review

Akhil Amar chides legal scholars for believing that the current system of criminal procedure, both substantive and remedial, is constitutionally compelled. He writes, "Scholars should know better, but too few of those who write in criminal procedure do serious, sustained scholarship in constitutional law generally, or in fields like federal jurisdiction and remedies" (p. 115). Amar believes, as I do, that criminal procedure has been impoverished by its failure to connect to "larger themes of constitutional, remedial and jurisdictional theory" (p. 115). But as one who has done serious, sustained scholarship in all the areas Amar mentions - or so …

Ad Hoc Adjudication: People V. Champion, Another Confusing Element In The Turmoil Following Minnesota V. Dickerson, Audra A. Dial

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department: People V. King

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Supreme Court, Queens County: People V. Brewer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deciding The Stop And Frisk Cases: A Look Inside The Supreme Court's Conference, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

In our system of constitutional decision-making, the Supreme Court makes law as an institution in its formal written opinions. The Court and its individual members make their official legal marks in the printed pages of the United States Reports. In June 1968, in Terry v. Ohio and Sibron v. New York, the two decisions that approved the constitutionality under the Fourth Amendment of police stop and frisk practices, the Court filled many official pages with rich discussion. Over the ensuing thirty years, these Court and individual opinions have shaped the course of constitutional analysis in our courts and guided the …

Off Broadway: The Supreme Court's Criminal Law Decisions In The 1996 Term Take Second Stage In An Historic Term, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Passenger Profiling: A Greater Terror Than Terrorism Itself, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 167 (1998), Donna Smith

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Of Ohio V. Richard D. Chilton And State Of Ohio V. John W. Terry: The Suppression Hearing And Trial Transcripts, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

This appendix to Deciding the Stop and Frisk Cases: A Look Inside the Supreme Court’s Conference, 72 St. John’s L. Rev. 749 (1998), includes Biographical Information on the Participants in the Case; and transcripts of the complete pretrial and trial proceedings in the 1964 criminal prosecutions of Richard Chilton and John Terry, arranged by Prof. Barrett to create the organization reflected in the Table of Contents at the beginning of the appendix. Footnotes were added to provide citations and, in a few instances, to clarify the text. Bracketed material was added to correct obvious slips of the tongue or the …

Claims For Damages For Violations Of State Constitutional Rights - Analysis Of The Recent Court Of Appeals Decision In Brown V. New York; The Resolved And Unresolved Issues, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

New York Vs. "The Rest Of The Country": State Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Barry Latzer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

What's In A Word? A Comparative Analysis Of Article I, § 12 Of The New York State Constitution And The Fourth Amendment To The United States Constitution As Interpreted By The New York Court Of Appeals And The United States Supreme Court, Douglas Holden Wigdor

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Supreme Court, Bronx County: People V. Johnson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Street Locations: Downtown Cleveland, October 31, 1963, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

This appendix to Deciding the Stop and Frisk Cases: A Look Inside the Supreme Court’s Conference, 72 St. John’s L. Rev. 749 (1998), consists of a map drawn by Jill Dinneen (SJU Law '99), based on Sanborn maps from the 1950s and 1960s, photographs and eyewitness descriptions of downtown Cleveland then and now; and a key to marked locations on the map.

The Execution Of Search Warrants, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Court Of Appeals: People V. Funches

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Court Of Appeals: People V. Turriago

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department: People V. Smith

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department: People V. Lafontaine

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department: People V. Hichez

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Car Wars: The Fourth Amendment's Death On The Highway, David A. Harris

Articles

In just the past few terms, the Supreme Court has issued several decisions that have increased police discretion to stop and question drivers and passengers and search both these persons and their vehicles. These cases are only the latest in a line that has slowly but surely made it ever easier for police to do these things without being concerned with procedural or constitutional obstacles.

This article traces the history of those cases, and argues that, however much protection the Fourth Amendment might accord to an ordinary citizen in his or her home or even walking down the street, it …