Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Out Of The “Serbonian Bog”1 Surrounding Government Acquisition Of Third-Party Cell Site Location Information: “Get A Warrant” †, Glenn Williams

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Chilling: The Constitutional Implications Of Body-Worn Cameras And Facial Recognition Technology At Public Protests, Julian R. Murphy

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In recent years body-worn cameras have been championed by community groups, scholars, and the courts as a potential check on police misconduct. Such has been the enthusiasm for body-worn cameras that, in a relatively short time, they have been rolled out to police departments across the country. Perhaps because of the optimism surrounding these devices there has been little consideration of the Fourth Amendment issues they pose, especially when they are coupled with facial recognition technology (FRT). There is one particular context in which police use of FRT equipped body-worn cameras is especially concerning: public protests. This Comment constitutes the ...

From Storefront To Dashboard: The Use Of The Americans With Disabilities Act To Govern Websites, Kelby S. Carlson

Catholic University Law Review

The question of the effects of technological change on the interpretation of statutes is a complicated one. Particularly for statutes that govern a broad range of issues, the advent of new technology can precipitate re-examination of the rationale behind, and nature of, the relevant law. The Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted, in part, to give Americans with disabilities greater access to public space, allowing them to enjoy the advantages such access offers on an equal footing with the able-bodied. The adoption of digital technology across society and, in particular, the widespread ubiquity of the internet now raise questions about ...

Fourth Amendment Protection In The Digital Age, Daniel Sorkin

GGU Law Review Blog

The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Carpenter v United States, a case that offers the Court another opportunity to address how far Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless searches and seizures extend. Specifically, the issue before the Court was “whether the warrantless seizure and search of historical cell phone records revealing the locations and movement of a cell phone user over the course of 127 days is permitted by the Fourth Amendment.”

On appeal before the Sixth Circuit, a divided three-judge panel held that “no search occurred under the Fourth Amendment because Carpenter had no reasonable expectation of privacy in cell ...

Fourth Amendment Constraints On The Technological Monitoring Of Convicted Sex Offenders, Ben A. Mcjunkin, J. J. Prescott

Articles

More than forty U.S. states currently track at least some of their convicted sex offenders using GPS devices. Many offenders will be monitored for life. The burdens and expense of living indefinitely under constant technological monitoring have been well documented, but most commentators have assumed that these burdens were of no constitutional moment because states have characterized such surveillance as ‘‘civil’’ in character—and courts have seemed to agree. In 2015, however, the Supreme Court decided in Grady v. North Carolina that attaching a GPS monitoring device to a person was a Fourth Amendment search, notwithstanding the ostensibly civil ...

Fourth Amendment Fairness, Richard M. Re

Michigan Law Review

Fourth Amendment doctrine is attentive to a wide range of interests, including security, informational privacy, and dignity. How should courts reconcile these competing concerns when deciding which searches and seizures are “unreasonable”? Current doctrine typically answers this question by pointing to interest aggregation: the various interests at stake are added up, placed on figurative scales, and compared, with the goal of promoting overall social welfare. But interest aggregation is disconnected from many settled doctrinal rules and leads to results that are unfair for individuals. The main alternative is originalism; but historical sources themselves suggest that the Fourth Amendment calls for ...

The Futile Fourth Amendment: Understanding Police Excessive Force Doctrine Through An Empirical Assessment Of Graham V. Connor, Osagie K. Obasogie, Zachary Newman

Northwestern University Law Review

Graham v. Connor established the modern constitutional landscape for police excessive force claims. The Supreme Court not only refined an objective reasonableness test to describe the constitutional standard, but also held that the Fourth Amendment is the sole avenue for courts to adjudicate claims that police violated a person’s constitutional rights in using force. In this Essay, we ask: What impact did this decision have on the nature of police excessive force claims in federal courts? To address this, we engaged in a qualitative examination of 500 federal cases (250 in the twenty-six years before Graham and 250 in ...

The Exigencies Of Drunk Driving: Cripps V. State And The Issues With Taking Drivers' Blood Without A Warrant, Timothy Andrea

Boston College Law Review

Few of the government’s investigatory techniques implicate individual privacy concerns more than the taking and testing of a suspect’s blood. These blood draws are a common tool used to fight drunk driving. In 2013, in Missouri v. McNeely, the U.S. Supreme Court reiterated the need for case-by-case review when considering whether exigent circumstances justify warrantless blood testing of drunk driving suspects. An Oklahoma statute takes a different approach by categorically abdicating the warrant requirement and authorizing law enforcement to draw blood from any driver involved in an accident that results in serious bodily injury. In 2016, in ...

“You’Re Not Gonna Reach My Telephone”— The Resurgence Of The Fourth Amendment’S Particularity Requirement, Tammie Beassie Banko

SMU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bounded By The Constitution: Resolving The Private Search Doctrine Circuit Split, Mark Kifarkis

Concordia Law Review

This Article analyzes the private search doctrine exception to the Fourth Amendment and the exception's application to smart phones and computers. The private search doctrine allows governmental authorities to replicate a private individual's search without obtaining a warrant. This Article proposes a standard for court's to use to resolve the circuit split on how to apply the exception to today's technology. Presently, there are two standards used by courts. The Article names one standard as the "boundless search approach" that is used by the Fifth and Seventh Circuits. The Article names the other standard as "bounded ...

Lacking Regulated Policy For Dna Evidence, Maia Lister

Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science

Despite its strong presence in criminal justice, DNA analysis is still a minimally regulated area. This minimal regulation devalues DNA evidence through the inconsistencies in these areas. The analysis methods of low template DNA lack a uniform method resulting in varying levels of reliability. Utilizing familial searches to assist in criminal investigations can potentially violate citizen rights. Such violations can also be found in the collection of DNA samples before an arrestee is tried or convicted. There are, however, regulations that could be applied universally to combat the problems that were discussed.

Investigative Practices For Large Money Laundering Crimes, Mary Hutley-Washington

Economic Crime Forensics Capstones

Reportedly, governments, states departments, analysts and law enforcement state, "money laundering has a corrosive effect on a country’s economy. The degree of destruction caused by money laundering interrupts the business flow, runs the risk of financial burdens on banks, and ruins countless countries’ reputation for allowing widespread laundering. Money laundering’s significant consequences are the exposure to the communities; because of the criminal elements individuals are subjected to laundering, i.e., fraud, drug trafficking, and other financial crimes” (Freeman, 2011). It is no surprise that internationally all communities want the battle against money laundering and its use to finance ...

A Tale Of Two Clauses: Search And Seizure, Establishment Of Religion, And Constitutional Reason, Perry Dane

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article dissects two developments in widely separate areas of American constitutional law—the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test for the Fourth Amendment’s Search and Seizure Clause and the “endorsement” test for the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. These two stories might seem worlds apart, and they have not previously been systematically examined together. Nevertheless, the Article argues that they have in common at least three important symptoms of our legal culture’s deep malaise. These three phenomena occur in other contexts, too, but they appear with special clarity and a stark cumulative force in the two stories on ...

Is Your Smartphone Conversation Private? The Stingray Device’S Impact On Privacy In States, Katherine M. Sullivan

Catholic University Law Review

“Where are you” is a common question to receive on your cellphone, but it is up to you whether or not to respond with an answer. No longer does this question need to be asked due to advancements in surveillance technology. When pinpointing a criminal suspect, the question can be answered by local and state agencies, without the person of interest knowing, by using a StingRay device. The main question to be asked is does the conduct of locating a criminal suspect’s exact location without a warrant, violate an individual’s Fourth Amendment Constitutional right to be free from ...

Hernandez V. Mesa: Preserving The Zone Of Constitutional Uncertainty At The Border, Alexandra A. Botsaris

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sniffing Out The Fourth Amendment: United States V. Place-Dog Sniffs-Ten Years Later, Hope Walker Hall

Maine Law Review

In the endless and seemingly futile government war against drugs, protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution may have fallen by the wayside as courts struggle to deal with drug offenders. The compelling government interest in controlling the influx of drugs all too often results in a judicial attitude that the ends justify the means. Judges can be reluctant to exclude evidence of drugs found in an unlawful search pursuant to the exclusionary rule, which provides that illegally obtained evidence may not be used at trial. The exclusion of drugs as evidence in drug cases often ...

Dead Canaries In The Coal Mines: The Symbolic Assailant Revisited, Jeannine Bell

Georgia State University Law Review

The well-publicized deaths of several African-Americans—Tamir Rice, Philando Castile, and Alton Sterling among others—at the hands of police stem from tragic interactions predicated upon well-understood practices analyzed by police scholars since the 1950s. The symbolic assailant, a construct created by police scholar Jerome Skolnick in the mid-1960s to identify persons whose behavior and characteristics the police view as threatening, is especially relevant to contemporary policing. This Article explores the societal roots of the creation of a Black symbolic assailant in contemporary American policing.

The construction of African-American men as symbolic assailants is one of the most important factors ...

Arrested Development: Rethinking Fourth Amendment Standards For Seizures And Uses Of Force In Schools, Alexis Karteron

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Implications Of The Private Search Doctrine In A Digital Age: Advocating For Limitations On Warrantless Searches Through Adoption Of The Virtual File Approach, Brianna M. Espeland

Idaho Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lack Of “Purposefulness” & “Flagrancy” Or Simply Turning A Blind Eye To The Current State Of Affairs?: The Need For Statistical Data, Renei Caballes

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment argues that the Court misapplied the attenuation doctrine in Strieff, specifically in its application and interpretation of the language “purposeful and flagrant” and explores the possible implications of this decision. First, Section I explains the Fourth Amendment and the basic principles of law regarding searches and seizures, including the exclusionary rule and attenuation doctrine. Then, Section II examines the circuit court split prior to Utah v. Strieff and how each circuit interpreted the language “purposeful and flagrant.” Finally, Section III analyzes the issues with the Supreme Court’s interpretation of “purposeful and flagrant” in Utah v. Strieff and ...