Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 22 of 22
Full-Text Articles in Law
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Celaj, Danielle Dupré
Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Celaj, Danielle Dupré
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Apellate Division, Third Department, People V. Kelley, Elyssa Lane
Apellate Division, Third Department, People V. Kelley, Elyssa Lane
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Mundo, Avinoam Cohen
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Mundo, Avinoam Cohen
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Johnson, Denise Shanley
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Johnson, Denise Shanley
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Of Myths And Mapp: A Response To Professor Magee, Sheri Johnson
Of Myths And Mapp: A Response To Professor Magee, Sheri Johnson
Sheri Lynn Johnson
No abstract provided.
Profiling With Apologies, Sherry F. Colb
Probabilities In Probable Cause And Beyond: Statistical Versus Concrete Harms, Sherry F. Colb
Probabilities In Probable Cause And Beyond: Statistical Versus Concrete Harms, Sherry F. Colb
Sherry Colb
No abstract provided.
A World Without Privacy: Why Property Does Not Define The Limits Of The Right Against Unreasonable Searches And Seizures, Sherry F. Colb
A World Without Privacy: Why Property Does Not Define The Limits Of The Right Against Unreasonable Searches And Seizures, Sherry F. Colb
Sherry Colb
No abstract provided.
Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing Can No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb
Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing Can No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb
Sherry Colb
No abstract provided.
Stopping A Moving Target, Sherry F. Colb
Riley V. California: What It Means For Metadata, Border Searches, And The Future Of Privacy, Adam Lamparello
Riley V. California: What It Means For Metadata, Border Searches, And The Future Of Privacy, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
Private information is no longer stored only in homes or other areas traditionally protected from warrantless intrusion. The private lives of many citizens are contained in a digital device no larger than the palm of their hand—and carried in public places. But that does not make the data within a cell phone any less private, just as the dialing of a phone number does not voluntarily waive an individual’s right to keep their call log or location private. Remember that we are not talking about individuals suspected of committing violent crimes. The Government is recording the calls and locations of …
Criminal Procedure Decisions In The October 2005 Term, Susan N. Herman
Criminal Procedure Decisions In The October 2005 Term, Susan N. Herman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Amici Curiae -- Heien V. State Of North Carolina, Charles E. Maclean, Adam Lamparello
Brief Of Amici Curiae -- Heien V. State Of North Carolina, Charles E. Maclean, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
Reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity cannot be predicated on conduct that does not violate the law. Put differently, if reasonableness — or reasonable suspicion — is to mean anything, it means that apparent violations of the law must be based on actual violations of the law. The North Carolina Supreme Court’s decision sends a message to drivers throughout the country that they cannot be wrong about what the law requires, even where law enforcement is wrong — dead wrong — about what the law proscribes.
The Case For Rational Basis Review Of General Suspicionless Searches And Seizures, Richard C. Worf
The Case For Rational Basis Review Of General Suspicionless Searches And Seizures, Richard C. Worf
Touro Law Review
This article examines the constitutional status of suspicionless searches and seizures of groups- an exceedingly important question in the age of terror, and a subject recently brought back to the forefront by the searches of subway passengers in New York City. It draws on process theory to argue that when a legislature has authorized a group search or seizure, courts should generally apply rational basis review.
First, other areas of constitutional doctrine exhibit deep trust in the power of groups to protect their interests in political process, and there is no reason why fourth amendment doctrine should not do the …
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Hall, Eric Pack
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Hall, Eric Pack
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Burton, Diane Matero
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Burton, Diane Matero
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2006 Term, Susan N. Herman
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2006 Term, Susan N. Herman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court Of New York Appellate Division, Third Department - People V. Ruppert, Sardar Asadullah
Supreme Court Of New York Appellate Division, Third Department - People V. Ruppert, Sardar Asadullah
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court Of New York Appellate Division, Third Department - People V. Willette, Mark Tsukerman
Supreme Court Of New York Appellate Division, Third Department - People V. Willette, Mark Tsukerman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Back To The Future: The Constitution Requires Reasonableness And Particularity—Introducing The “Seize But Don’T Search” Doctrine, Adam Lamparello, Charles E. Maclean
Back To The Future: The Constitution Requires Reasonableness And Particularity—Introducing The “Seize But Don’T Search” Doctrine, Adam Lamparello, Charles E. Maclean
Adam Lamparello
Issuing one-hundred or fewer opinions per year, the United States Supreme Court cannot keep pace with opinions that match technological advancement. As a result, in Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie, the Court needs to announce a broader principle that protects privacy in the digital age. That principle, what we call “seize but don’t search,” recognizes that the constitutional touchstone for all searches is reasonableness.
When do present-day circumstances—the evolution in the Government’s surveillance capabilities, citizens’ phone habits, and the relationship between the NSA and telecom companies—become so thoroughly unlike those considered by the Supreme Court thirty-four years …
Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports
Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
This piece argues that the Supreme Court's April 2014 decision in Navarette v. Calfornia, like last Term's opinion in Florida v. Harris, deviates from longstanding Supreme Court precedent treating probable cause and reasonable suspicion as totality-of-the-circumstances tests. Instead, these two recent rulings essentially rely on rigid rules to define probable cause and reasonable suspicion. The article criticizes the Court for selectively endorsing bright-line tests that favor the prosecution, and argues that both decisions generate rules that oversimplify and therefore tend to be overinclusive.
The Law And Economics Of Stop-And-Frisk, David S. Abrams
The Law And Economics Of Stop-And-Frisk, David S. Abrams
All Faculty Scholarship
The relevant economic and legal research relating to police use of stop-and-frisk has largely been distinct. There is much to be gained by taking an interdisciplinary approach. This Essay emphasizes some of the challenges faced by those seeking to evaluate the efficacy and legality of stop-and-frisk, and suggests some ways forward and areas of exploration for future research.