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

Law Commons

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

Criminal Procedure

Probable cause

Institution
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 1 - 30 of 92

Full-Text Articles in Law

Border Searches For Investigatory Purposes: Implementing A Border Nexus Standard, Brenna Ferris Jun 2021

Border Searches For Investigatory Purposes: Implementing A Border Nexus Standard, Brenna Ferris

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

Border searches are a commonly used exception to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause and warrant requirements. Using a border search, the government can conduct searches of individuals without any kind of individualized suspicion. Border searches pose a concerning risk to privacy when they are used as a tool for criminal investigations. The Supreme Court has never ruled on searches used in this way, but lower courts are addressing the technique and reaching conflicting decisions. Courts need to take an approach that will protect the privacy interests of individuals while allowing the government to advance its interests in protecting its ...


Revitalizing Fourth Amendment Protections: A True Totality Of The Circumstances Test In § 1983 Probable Cause Determinations, Ryan Sullivan Feb 2020

Revitalizing Fourth Amendment Protections: A True Totality Of The Circumstances Test In § 1983 Probable Cause Determinations, Ryan Sullivan

College of Law, Faculty Publications

The Article analyzes claims of police misconduct and false arrest, specifically addressing the issue of whether a police officer may ignore evidence of an affirmative defense, such as self-defense, when determining probable cause for an arrest. The inquiry most often arises in § 1983 civil claims for false arrest where the officer was aware of some evidence a crime had been committed, but was also aware of facts indicating the suspect had an affirmative defense to the crime observed. In extreme cases, the affirmative defense at issue is actually self-defense in response to the officer’s own unlawful conduct. As police ...


Clarifying The Scope Of The Self-Incrimination Clause: City Of Hays V. Vogt, Samantha Ruben Feb 2019

Clarifying The Scope Of The Self-Incrimination Clause: City Of Hays V. Vogt, Samantha Ruben

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Three months after oral arguments, the Supreme Court dismissed the writ of certiorari in City of Hays v. Vogt as improvidently granted. The question in Vogt was whether the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is violated when incriminating statements are used at a probable cause hearing, as opposed to a criminal trial. As a result of the “DIG,” the Court left a circuit split unresolved surrounding the meaning of a “criminal case” within the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination Clause.

This note argues that the Supreme Court should not have dismissed Vogt and should have decided that the Fifth Amendment right ...


Forensic Border Searches After Carpenter Require Probable Cause And A Warrant, Christopher I. Pryby Jan 2019

Forensic Border Searches After Carpenter Require Probable Cause And A Warrant, Christopher I. Pryby

Michigan Law Review

Under the border search doctrine, courts have upheld the federal government's practice of searching people and their possessions upon entry into or exit from the United States, without any requirement of suspicion, as reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Since the advent of electronic devices with large storage capacities, courts have grappled with whether this definition of reasonableness continues to apply. So far, courts have consistently characterized “nonforensic” border inspections of electronic devices (for example, paging through photos on a phone) as “routine” searches that, like inspecting luggage brought across international lines, require no suspicion. But there is a circuit ...


State V. Nelson: Determining "Reasonable Suspicion" For Investigatory Stops In Maine, Sandra Denison Shannon Apr 2018

State V. Nelson: Determining "Reasonable Suspicion" For Investigatory Stops In Maine, Sandra Denison Shannon

Maine Law Review

In 1994 the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held in State v. Nelson that a police officer's observation of motorist Theodore Nelson consuming a single can of beer over a one-hour time period did not, by itself, give rise to a reasonable suspicion that Nelson thereafter illegally operated the vehicle under the influence of alcohol. This Note analyzes the Law Court's decision in Nelson. In its analysis, this Note compares Nelson to several other Maine opinions and recommends that, if the Maine Law Court is to continue to adhere to both objective and subjective ...


Whren V. United States: An Abrupt End To The Debate Over Pretextual Stops, Brian J. O'Donnell Mar 2018

Whren V. United States: An Abrupt End To The Debate Over Pretextual Stops, Brian J. O'Donnell

Maine Law Review

In Whren v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that a traffic stop is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if a police officer has probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred, even if the stop is a pretext for the investigation of a more serious offense. The Court affirmed the convictions of Michael A. Whren and James L. Brown, who had been arrested on federal drug charges after Washington, D.C., police stopped Brown for minor traffic infractions. The Court's unanimous opinion, delivered by Justice Scalia, brought an end to a long-running debate over ...


Exigent Circumstances And Searches Incident To Arrest In New York: The Difficulties And Distinctions, Kyle Knox Jan 2018

Exigent Circumstances And Searches Incident To Arrest In New York: The Difficulties And Distinctions, Kyle Knox

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Hotline Ping: Harmonizing Contemporary Cell Phone Technology With Traditional Fourth Amendment Protections, Brianne M. Chevalier Jan 2017

Hotline Ping: Harmonizing Contemporary Cell Phone Technology With Traditional Fourth Amendment Protections, Brianne M. Chevalier

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.


First They Came For The Child Pornographers: The Fbi's International Search Warrant To Hack The Dark Web, Zoe Russell Jan 2017

First They Came For The Child Pornographers: The Fbi's International Search Warrant To Hack The Dark Web, Zoe Russell

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.


Why Arrest?, Rachel A. Harmon Dec 2016

Why Arrest?, Rachel A. Harmon

Michigan Law Review

Arrests are the paradigmatic police activity. Though the practice of arrests in the United States, especially arrests involving minority suspects, is under attack, even critics widely assume the power to arrest is essential to policing. As a result, neither commentators nor scholars have asked why police need to make arrests. This Article takes up that question, and it argues that the power to arrest and the use of that power should be curtailed. The twelve million arrests police conduct each year are harmful not only to the individual arrested but also to their families and communities and to society as ...


Law Professor's Sabbatical In District Attorney's Office, Bobby Marzine Harges Mar 2016

Law Professor's Sabbatical In District Attorney's Office, Bobby Marzine Harges

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports Jan 2016

Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports

Kit Kinports

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.


Camreta And Al-Kidd: The Supreme Court, The Fourth Amendment, And Witnesses, Kit Kinports Jan 2016

Camreta And Al-Kidd: The Supreme Court, The Fourth Amendment, And Witnesses, Kit Kinports

Kit Kinports

Although few noticed the link between them, two Supreme Court cases decided in the same week last Term, Ashcroft v. al-Kidd and Camreta v. Greene, both involved the Fourth Amendment implications of detaining witnesses to a crime. Al-Kidd, an American citizen, was arrested under the federal material witness statute in connection with an investigation into terrorist activities, and Greene, a nine-year-old suspected victim of child abuse, was seized and interrogated at school by two state officials. The opinions issued in the two cases did little to resolve the constitutional issues that arise in witness detention cases, and in fact muddied ...


Search Incident To Probable Cause?: The Intersection Of Rawlings And Knowles, Marissa Perry Jan 2016

Search Incident To Probable Cause?: The Intersection Of Rawlings And Knowles, Marissa Perry

Michigan Law Review

The search incident to arrest exception authorizes an officer to search an arrestee’s person and his or her area of immediate control. This exception is based on two historical justifications: officer safety and evidence preservation. While much of search incident to arrest doctrine is settled, tension exists between two Supreme Court cases, Rawlings v. Kentucky and Knowles v. Iowa, and a crucial question remains unanswered: Must an officer decide to make an arrest prior to commencing a search? In Rawlings, the Supreme Court stated that a search may precede a formal arrest if the arrest follows quickly thereafter. In ...


The Big Picture View Of Anonymous Tips From Ordinary People, Amanda M. Dadiego Jan 2016

The Big Picture View Of Anonymous Tips From Ordinary People, Amanda M. Dadiego

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Shift Of The Balance Of Advantage In Criminal Litigation: The Case Of Mr. Simpson, David Robinson Jr. Jul 2015

The Shift Of The Balance Of Advantage In Criminal Litigation: The Case Of Mr. Simpson, David Robinson Jr.

Akron Law Review

The intense public interest in the extraordinary trial and acquittal of Mr. O.J. Simpson provides an appropriate occasion to look at the criminal justice system more generally, to note where we have been in the balance of advantage between prosecution and defense, where we are now, and where, perhaps, we should be.


Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Celaj, Danielle Dupré Dec 2014

Appellate Division, First Department, People V. Celaj, Danielle Dupré

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Apellate Division, Third Department, People V. Kelley, Elyssa Lane Dec 2014

Apellate Division, Third Department, People V. Kelley, Elyssa Lane

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Race And The Decision To Detain A Suspect, Sheri Johnson Dec 2014

Race And The Decision To Detain A Suspect, Sheri Johnson

Sheri Lynn Johnson

No abstract provided.


The Qualitative Dimension Of Fourth Amendment "Reasonableness", Sherry F. Colb Dec 2014

The Qualitative Dimension Of Fourth Amendment "Reasonableness", Sherry F. Colb

Sherry Colb

Supreme Court doctrine protects two seemingly distinct kinds of interests under the heading of privacy rights: one "substantive," the other "procedural." The Fourth Amendment guarantee against "unreasonable searches and seizures" has been generally interpreted to protect procedural privacy. Searches are typically defined as governmental inspections of activities and locations in which an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy from observation. In the typical case, this reasonable expectation of privacy may be breached only where the government has acquired a quantitatively substantial objective basis for believing that the search would uncover evidence of a crime. Substantive privacy rights have not ...


Probabilities In Probable Cause And Beyond: Statistical Versus Concrete Harms, Sherry F. Colb Dec 2014

Probabilities In Probable Cause And Beyond: Statistical Versus Concrete Harms, Sherry F. Colb

Sherry Colb

No abstract provided.


Innocence, Privacy, And Targeting In Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Sherry F. Colb Dec 2014

Innocence, Privacy, And Targeting In Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, 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 Dec 2014

Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing Can No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb

Sherry Colb

No abstract provided.


Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Barnville, David Schoenhaar Nov 2014

Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Barnville, David Schoenhaar

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Justification For Police Intrusions, Corey Rashkover Nov 2014

Justification For Police Intrusions, Corey Rashkover

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation From The October 2006 Term, Martin Schwartz Jun 2014

Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation From The October 2006 Term, Martin Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.


Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Hall, Eric Pack May 2014

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 May 2014

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 May 2014

Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2006 Term, Susan N. Herman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports Jan 2014

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.