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

Fourth Amendment Commons

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

977 Full-Text Articles 698 Authors 296605 Downloads 65 Institutions

All Articles in Fourth Amendment

Faceted Search

977 full-text articles. Page 1 of 27.

Castaneda V. State Of Nevada, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (June 16, 2016), Chelsea Finnegan 2016 Nevada Law Journal

Castaneda V. State Of Nevada, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (June 16, 2016), Chelsea Finnegan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant was convicted of 15 counts of child pornography under NRS 200.730. Appellant contested 14 of the 15 charges, arguing that his possession of 15 images of child pornography constituted only one violation. The Court agreed and determined that prosecuting each image or depiction of child pornography as a separate charge under NRS 200.730 is not what the legislature intended. The statute should not be read to charge each “possession” as one violation. The Court reversed 14 of the charges.


“Criminal Records” - A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn 2016 University of Georgia School of Law

“Criminal Records” - A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.


A Fourth Amendment Framework For The Free Exercise Clause, Adam Lamparello 2016 Notre Dame Law School

A Fourth Amendment Framework For The Free Exercise Clause, Adam Lamparello

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.


If You Fly A Drone, So Can Police, Stephen E. Henderson 2016 University of Oklahoma College of Law

If You Fly A Drone, So Can Police, Stephen E. Henderson

Stephen E Henderson


According to the U.S. Constitution, the more you fly your drone, the more police can fly theirs. “Come on,” you might reply, “that hoary document”—and, yes, sorry to make you the sort who drops words like hoary—“that hoary document surely says nothing about drones.” But in fact it does. At least it does as interpreted by the courts. In particular, it is how they interpret the Fourth Amendment. So, to understand this aspect of drones, we first must understand this provision of the Bill of Rights...


The Connected State Of Things: A Lawyer’S Survival Guide In An Internet Of Things World, Antigone Peyton 2016 Cloudigy Law PLLC

The Connected State Of Things: A Lawyer’S Survival Guide In An Internet Of Things World, Antigone Peyton

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.


Time To Rethink Cybersecurity Reform: The Opm Data Breach And The Case For Centralized Cybersecurity Infrastructure, Zachary Figueroa 2016 Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law

Time To Rethink Cybersecurity Reform: The Opm Data Breach And The Case For Centralized Cybersecurity Infrastructure, Zachary Figueroa

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.


Decrypting Our Security: A Bipartisan Argument For A Rational Solution To The Encryption Challenge, Jamil N. Jaffer, Daniel J. Rosenthal 2016 George Mason University Law School

Decrypting Our Security: A Bipartisan Argument For A Rational Solution To The Encryption Challenge, Jamil N. Jaffer, Daniel J. Rosenthal

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.


Suspicion And The Protection Of Fourth Amendment Values, Fabio Arcila Jr. 2016 Touro Law Center

Suspicion And The Protection Of Fourth Amendment Values, Fabio Arcila Jr.

Fabio Arcila Jr.

Suspicion is perhaps the core foundational principle through which we seek to protect and vindicate Fourth Amendment values. Fourth Amendment law could not be clearer, and repeats over and over again, that it proceeds from a presumptive suspicion requirement. We are all so familiar with that proposition that we can easily incant it: a governmental search is presumptively unconstitutional unless supported by some threshold of prior suspicion. Though suspicion is thus a hallmark of Fourth Amendment black letter law, I come to critique it. I critique it because the presumptive suspicion requirement's provenance is historically questionable, both as a ...


Suspicion And The Protection Of Fourth Amendment Values, Fabio Arcila Jr. 2016 Touro Law Center

Suspicion And The Protection Of Fourth Amendment Values, Fabio Arcila Jr.

Fabio Arcila Jr.

Suspicion is perhaps the core foundational principle through which we seek to protect and vindicate Fourth Amendment values. Fourth Amendment law could not be clearer, and repeats over and over again, that it proceeds from a presumptive suspicion requirement. We are all so familiar with that proposition that we can easily incant it: a governmental search is presumptively unconstitutional unless supported by some threshold of prior suspicion. Though suspicion is thus a hallmark of Fourth Amendment black letter law, I come to critique it. I critique it because the presumptive suspicion requirement's provenance is historically questionable, both as a ...


Closing The Gap Between What Is Lawful And What Is Right In Police Use Of Force Jurisprudence By Making Police Departments More Democratic Institutions, Jonathan M. Smith 2016 UDC David A. Clarke School of Law

Closing The Gap Between What Is Lawful And What Is Right In Police Use Of Force Jurisprudence By Making Police Departments More Democratic Institutions, Jonathan M. Smith

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown was shot to death in Ferguson, Missouri, by police officer Darren Wilson. Members of the Ferguson community rose up in response. Protests demanding that police violence against African Americans cease and that accountability for police misconduct be addressed erupted across the country, and they have not subsided since. Incidents in Baltimore, Maryland; Chicago, Illinois; WallerCounty, Texas; and elsewhere have kept the movement alive. The mass media, the political elite, and the White middle class woke up to a reality that had been long known to communities of color – force is used disproportionately against people ...


The Positive Law Model Of The Fourth Amendment, William Baude, James Y. Stern 2016 William & Mary Law School

The Positive Law Model Of The Fourth Amendment, William Baude, James Y. Stern

Faculty Publications

For fifty years, courts have used a “reasonable expectation of privacy” standard to define “searches” under the Fourth Amendment. As others have recognized, that doctrine is subjective, unpredictable, and conceptually confused, but viable alternatives have been slow to emerge. This Article supplies one.

We argue that Fourth Amendment protection should be anchored in background positive law. The touchstone of the search-and-seizure analysis should be whether government officials have done something forbidden to private parties. It is those actions that should be subjected to Fourth Amendment reasonableness review and the presumptive requirement to obtain a warrant. In short, Fourth Amendment protection ...


"Virtual Certainty" In A Digital World: The Sixth Circuit's Application Of The Private Search Doctrine To Digital Storage Devices In United States V. Lichtenberger, Stephen Labrecque 2016 Boston College Law School

"Virtual Certainty" In A Digital World: The Sixth Circuit's Application Of The Private Search Doctrine To Digital Storage Devices In United States V. Lichtenberger, Stephen Labrecque

Boston College Law Review

In 2015 in United States v. Lichtenberger, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that police violated the Fourth Amendment by exceeding the scope of a private search of computer files. This decision deviated from holdings of the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Seventh Circuits, which held that under the private search doctrine, police could more thoroughly search digital devices that were previously searched by a private party. The Sixth Circuit created a circuit split by failing to apply the closed container approach to the digital storage devices in Lichtenberger. This Comment ...


Immigrant Rights In Jeopardy: A Denial Of Constitutional Protection In De La Paz V. Coy, Chris Modlish 2016 Boston College Law School

Immigrant Rights In Jeopardy: A Denial Of Constitutional Protection In De La Paz V. Coy, Chris Modlish

Boston College Law Review

On May 14, 2015, in De La Paz v. Coy, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that immigrants cannot bring Bivens actions seeking damages against individual federal immigration officials for Fourth Amendment violations. The court reasoned that because the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (“INA”) already provides immigrants with an adequate remedy for Fourth Amendment violations, a Bivens remedy should not be extended to this immigration enforcement context. The court based its conclusion on its determination that the INA both offers immigrants sufficient remedial mechanisms for constitutional violations and effectively deters federal immigration officers ...


Fourth Amendment Remedies As Rights: The Warrant Requirement, David Gray 2016 University of Maryland School of Law

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 ...


13th Annual Diversity Symposium Dinner 04-07-2016, Roger Williams University School of Law 2016 Roger Williams University

13th Annual Diversity Symposium Dinner 04-07-2016, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.


Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams 2016 Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center

Police Misconduct - A Plaintiff's Point Of View, Part Ii, John Williams

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky 2016 Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center

Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Supreme Court's 1998-1999 Term: Fourth Amendment Decisions, Kathryn R. Urbonya 2016 Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center

Supreme Court's 1998-1999 Term: Fourth Amendment Decisions, Kathryn R. Urbonya

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Big Stink About Garbage: State V. Mcmurray And A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy, Brittany Campbell 2016 Boston College Law School

The Big Stink About Garbage: State V. Mcmurray And A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy, Brittany Campbell

Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice

On March 11, 2015, the Supreme Court of Minnesota affirmed a lower court decision against David Ford McMurray, who was found guilty of third-degree possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to twenty-four months. McMurray was charged after Hutchinson, Minnesota police searched through his garbage and found evidence of methamphetamine. The majority held that a warrantless search of the defendant’s garbage was reasonable under the federal and state constitutions because a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in garbage set out for collection on the side of a public street because garbage is readily accessible to other members ...


Unpacking The Dirtbox: Confronting Cell Phone Location Tracking With The Fourth Amendment, Jonathan Bard 2016 Boston College Law School

Unpacking The Dirtbox: Confronting Cell Phone Location Tracking With The Fourth Amendment, Jonathan Bard

Boston College Law Review

Surveillance technology has raced ahead of the Fourth Amendment, forcing courts to confront high-tech intrusions with rusty jurisprudence. The Dirtbox, an airborne cell-site simulator, allows the government to sweep entire cities and intercept individuals’ cell phone location information without relying on cooperative intermediaries. This Note argues that the government’s use of the Dirtbox and other cell-site simulators amounts to a Fourth Amendment search because it may pinpoint individuals within a constitutionally protected space. Although the Department of Justice issued policy guidelines requiring its agents to obtain a search warrant before using this device, this narrow and unenforceable protocol fails ...


Digital Commons powered by bepress