Law Commons^™

The Need For Judicial Restriction On The Use Of Drug Detecting Canines, William R. Pomeroy

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this comment is to examine these issues, outline the conflicting positions, and attempt to forecast the direction the courts may take in their effort to bring some harmony to this unsettled (and to some, unsettling) area of law. Few people would attempt to deny law enforcement officials the use of this highly effective and relatively unintrusive law enforcement tool. Yet there are those who fear that the unsettled questions concerning limits on the use of this tool may lead to serious abuse, and who raise the specter of unlimited government intrusion should this type of investigatory activity …

Wilson V. Arkansas: Thirty Years After The Supreme Court Addresses The Knock And Announce Issue, Todd Witten

Akron Law Review

This Note will initially discuss the historical background of the knock and announce principle and its evolution from the English common law. Next, the Note will address the facts and the holdings of Wilson, in the lower courts and the Supreme Court. Finally, the Note will analyze the Wilson decision and its precedential value.

Overgeneralization Of The Hot Pursuit Doctrine Provides Another Blow To The Fourth Amendment In Middletown V. Flinchum, Nathan Vaughn

Akron Law Review

Unreasonable searches of the home have often been regarded as a serious infringement upon one’s right to privacy. The right to privacy is currently recognized by a variety of governments and has existed for hundreds of years. Although the Constitution does not grant an express right to privacy, the Supreme Court has consistently acknowledged the rights of personal privacy and zones of privacy. Affording extra protection to the home seems to show that our right to privacy is at its peak behind closed doors.

Unfortunately, the list of exceptions to the warrant requirement is large and continuously growing. These exceptions …

Two Wrongs Don't Make A Fourth Amendment Right: Samson Court Errs In Choosing Proper Analytical Framework, Errs In Result, Parolees Lose Fourth Amendment Protection, Rachael A. Lynch

Akron Law Review

This Note will follow the Fourth Amendment from its origins to its modern application to parolee rights, as evidenced by the Samson Court. Part II focuses on the Fourth Amendment, from the circumstances surrounding its adoption to modern court cases that have applied its tenets to prisoners, probationers, and, finally, parolees. Part III details the Supreme Court’s decision in Samson v. California, including a thorough discussion of the facts that gave rise to the case and lower court decisions. Part IV explores the problems with the Court’s framework and suggests other possible frameworks the Court could have used to come …