Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- DNA databases (4)
- Fourth Amendment (4)
- Search and seizure (3)
- Fourth amendment (2)
- Arrest (1)
-
- Biometric identification (1)
- Biometrics (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- DNA evidence (1)
- Drug dogs (1)
- Equal protection (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Exclusionary Rule (1)
- Familial searching (1)
- Fingerprints (1)
- Genetic exceptionalism (1)
- Genetic privacy (1)
- Good-Faith Exception (1)
- Kinship (1)
- Mayland v. King (1)
- Partial match (1)
- Privacy (1)
- Probable cause (1)
- Probable cause standard (1)
- Quantifiable evidence (1)
- Search or seizure (1)
- Special needs (1)
- Vagueness (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Getting Beyond Intuition In The Probable Cause Inquiry, Erica R. Goldberg
Getting Beyond Intuition In The Probable Cause Inquiry, Erica R. Goldberg
Journal Articles
Courts are proudly resigned to the fact that the probable cause inquiry is “nontechnical.” In order to conduct a search or make an arrest, police need to satisfy the probable cause standard, which the Supreme Court has deemed “incapable of precise definition or quantification into percentages.” The flexibility of this standard enables courts to defer to police officers’ reasonable judgments and expert intuitions in unique situations. However, police officers are increasingly using investigative techniques that replace their own observational skills with test results from some other source, such as drug sniffing dogs, facial recognition technology, and DNA matching. The reliability …
The Genealogy Detectives: A Constitutional Analysis Of 'Familial Searching', David H. Kaye
The Genealogy Detectives: A Constitutional Analysis Of 'Familial Searching', David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
“Familial searching” in law enforcement DNA databases has been pilloried as a step “towards eugenics and corruption of blood” and “lifelong genetic surveillance” that is “inconsistent with a basic pillar of American political thought.” Courts have yet to address the issue fully, but several commentators contend that the practice is unwise, unjust, or unconstitutional. This Article examines the more significant constitutional claims. It concludes that although kinship matching should not be implemented simply because it is technologically seductive, neither should it be removed from the realm of permissible law enforcement information gathering on constitutional grounds. In reaching this conclusion, the …
A Fourth Amendment Theory For Arrestee Dna And Other Biometric Databases, David H. Kaye
A Fourth Amendment Theory For Arrestee Dna And Other Biometric Databases, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
Routine DNA sampling following a custodial arrest process is now the norm in many jurisdictions, but is it consistent with the Fourth Amendment? The few courts that have addressed the question have disagreed on the answer, but all of them seem to agree on two points: (1) the reasonableness of the practice turns on a direct form of balancing of individual and governmental interests; and (2) individuals who are convicted — and even those who are merely arrested — have a greatly diminished expectation of privacy in their identities. This Article disputes these propositions and offers an improved framework for …
On The 'Considered Analysis' Of Collecting Dna Before Conviction, David H. Kaye
On The 'Considered Analysis' Of Collecting Dna Before Conviction, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
For nearly a decade, DNA-on-arrest laws eluded scrutiny in the courts. For another five years, they withstood a gathering storm of constitutional challenges. In Maryland v. King, however, Maryland's highest court reasoned that usually fingerprints provide everything police need to establish the true identity of an individual before trial and that the state's interest in finding the perpetrators of crimes by trawling databases of DNA profiles is too "generalized" to support "a warrantless, suspicionless search." The U.S. Supreme Court reacted forcefully. Chief Justice Roberts stayed the Maryland judgment, writing that "given the considered analysis of courts on the other side …
Maryland V. King: Per Se Unreasonableness, The Golden Rule, And The Future Of Dna Databases, David H. Kaye
Maryland V. King: Per Se Unreasonableness, The Golden Rule, And The Future Of Dna Databases, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court applied a balancing test to uphold a Maryland statute mandating preconviction collection and analysis of DNA from individuals charged with certain crimes. The DNA profiles are limited to an inherited set of DNA sequences that are not known to be functional and that are tokens of individual identity. This invited online essay examines two aspects of an article on the case by Professor Erin Murphy. I question the claim that the case is pivotal in a conceivable abandonment of the per se rule that warrantless, suspicionless searches are unconstitutional unless they fall …
The Dog Days Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports
The Dog Days Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This Article discusses Florida v. Harris and Florida v. Jardines, the two Fourth Amendment drug dog opinions issued by the Supreme Court earlier this year. Together the cases hold that a narcotics detection dog effects a “search” when it intrudes on a constitutionally protected area in order to collect evidence, but that the dog’s positive alert is generally sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. The piece argues that both cases essentially generate a bright-line rule, thereby deviating from precedent that favored a more amorphous standard considering all the surrounding circumstances. Like many purportedly clear rules, the ones …
Culpability, Deterrence, And The Exclusionary Rule, Kit Kinports
Culpability, Deterrence, And The Exclusionary Rule, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This Article discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the concepts of culpability and deterrence in its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, in particular, in the opinions applying the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The contemporary Court sees deterrence as the exclusionary rule’s sole function, and the Article begins by taking the Court at its word, evaluating its exclusionary rule case law on its own terms. Drawing on three different theories of deterrence – economic rational choice theory, organizational theory, and the expressive account of punishment – the Article analyzes the mechanics by which the exclusionary rule deters unconstitutional searches and questions …