Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility | Open Access Articles

United States V. Bean: Shoveling After The Elephant., Pannal Alan Sanders

St. Mary's Law Journal

Over the years Congress has enacted and amended several versions of the United States Code (U.S.C) § 925(c). Several reported cases illustrate the courts’ early efforts to develop a coherent body of jurisprudence with respect to the procedural and substantive aspects of U.S.C. § 925(c) judicial review. Specifically, the § 925(c) denials of relief by the Director before the congressional appropriations ban commenced in 1993. Although the methodology and reasoning behind these decisions differ in their details, several themes are discernable. First, even without the express provisions for judicial review added by the Firearms Owners Protection Act (FOPA), courts consistently …

Go to article

Privacy Lost: Comparing The Attenuation Of Texas's Article 1, Section 9 And The Fourth Amendment., Kimberly S. Keller

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that all searches and seizures be reasonable. Article I, Section 9 of the Texas Constitution mirrors its federal counterpart, requiring reasonableness in regard to intrusive governmental action. In examining these texts, both the federal and state provisions are comprised of two independent clauses: (1) the Reasonableness Clause, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures; and (2) the warrant clause, which provides that warrants may issue only upon a showing of probable cause. Both the federal and Texas constitutions include explicit language regulating the government’s right to intrude on a person’s privacy. This …

Go to article