Law Commons^™

Reconsideration Of The Katz Expectation Of Privacy Test, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note, by modifying certain aspects of the reasonable expectation of privacy test, offers a theory that attempts to identify the minimum content of the fourth amendment. In the first section, the Note examines the reasonable expectation of privacy test and considers whether it has been or can be applied in a manner that fails to protect the right to have certain minimum expectations of privacy. It analyzes both the "actual" and the "reasonable" expectation requirements, identifies weaknesses inherent in the current application of these requirements, and suggests certain ways in which they might be refined. In the second section, …

The Life And Times Of Boyd V. United States (1886-1976), Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

In Boyd v. United States, the Supreme Court held that the fourth and fifth amendments create a zone of privacy encompassing an individual's person and property. The government, according to Boyd, cannot enter this zone, either by compelling an individual to testify against himself or by subpoenaing or seizing his books and papers for use as evidence against him in a criminal or quasi-criminal proceeding. The Court found an "intimate relation" between the two amendments such that the search and seizure of books and papers may be "unreasonable" even if conducted pursuant to a court order.

Over time, …

The Prosecutor's Duty To Present Exculpatory Evidence To An Indicting Grand Jury, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note explores the implications of the stark procedural disparities between prosecution by information and prosecution by indictment in those states where both methods are used. It first examines the consequences to a defendant of a prosecutor's decision to seek an indictment rather than proceed by information, the reasons underlying the discretion given the prosecutor to choose between the two methods, and the potential for abuse of this discretionary power. It then considers several alternative approaches for minimizing this potential for abuse. After rejecting possible constitutional objections to the disparity between indictment and information procedures and application of the common-law …

Away From Waiver: A Rationale For The Forfeiture Of Constitutional Rights In Criminal Procedure, Peter Westen

Michigan Law Review

Ten years ago, when I was a student in law school, I learned that it was difficult for a criminal defendant to lose completely his right to assert constitutional defenses. The only way he could relinquish his constitutional defenses, I was told, was by actually "waiving" them. Moreover, in order to establish that a defendant had waived his defenses, the state faced a rigorous test: it had to show, in the famous phrase, that his waiver was "knowing, intelligent, and voluntary." In other words, before the state could permanently prevent a defendant from asserting constitutional defenses, it had to show …