Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Making The Grade: School-Based Telemedicine And Parental Consent, Emily G. Narum
Making The Grade: School-Based Telemedicine And Parental Consent, Emily G. Narum
San Diego Law Review
This Comment advocates for a uniform state-by-state regulation, requiring schools to obtain parental consent immediately before any telemedicine service is provided to their children at school. Alternatively, the constitutional issues could be eliminated if telemedicine consent forms enumerate a finite and limited list of what medical services may be provided. These reforms will ensure not only that parents’ and children’s constitutional rights are protected, but also that schools and doctors provide the most informed health care services. Part II describes a background of school-based health, as well as the benefits and risks of offering telemedicine in schools. Part III explains …
To Breathe, Or Not To Breathe: Passive Alcohol Sensors And The Fourth Amendment
To Breathe, Or Not To Breathe: Passive Alcohol Sensors And The Fourth Amendment
San Diego Law Review
No abstract provided.
An Analysis Of Terry V. Ohio And Its Implications Upon The California Law Of Stop And Frisk, Judith N. Keep
An Analysis Of Terry V. Ohio And Its Implications Upon The California Law Of Stop And Frisk, Judith N. Keep
San Diego Law Review
The controversy surrounding the legality of police "stop and frisk" practices at last has been partially resolved by the Supreme Court. In the case of Terry v. Ohio, which is further illuminated by its companion case Sibron v. New York, the Court established a constitutional standard for the frisk under the search and seizure clause of the fourth amendment. Additionally, it strongly suggested that the same standard would be applied to the stop. Thus, not only did the Court resolve the debate in favor of this often employed police practice, but under the doctrine of Mapp v. Ohio, the standard …
Searches And Seizures - Information Supplied By An Anonymous Informer Must Be Corroborated By Establishing That The Law Is Being Violated To Constitute A Basis For Probable Cause To Search Or Arrest Without'a Warrant: Verification Of Other Information Is Insufficient Corroboration. People V. Reeves (Cal. 1964), Armando L. Odorico
San Diego Law Review
This recent case discusses People v. Reeves (Cal. 1964)
Seizure Of Private Papers Pursuant To A Search Warrant: With Specific Application To Federal And California Bookmaking Prosecutions, Dennis G. Adams
Seizure Of Private Papers Pursuant To A Search Warrant: With Specific Application To Federal And California Bookmaking Prosecutions, Dennis G. Adams
San Diego Law Review
The federal exclusionary rule excludes evidence obtained by an illegal search and seizure. Recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, such as Mapp v. Ohio and Malloy v. Hogan, have made the federal exclusionary rule and the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination applicable to the states. Because this type of evidence usually forms the basis of bookmaking convictions, this article discusses whether such evidence can still be constitutionally seized in California. The author concludes that these Supreme Court cases have rendered California Penal Code § 1524, governing property validly seizable under a search warrant, unconstitutional.