Law Commons^™

The Securing Of The Premises Exception: A Search For The Proper Balance, Adam K. Peck

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Recent Development argues that although an opinion endorsed by only two justices is not binding precedent, this portion of Segura represents an undesirable departure from the strict protections traditionally afforded a person's privacy interest in the home and leaves lower courts confused about the constitutional limitations on seizures in the home. Part II examines prior Supreme Court opinions that have defined the parameters of permissible warrantless searches and seizures. Part III explores the circuit court opinions that have developed a "securing of the premises"exception. Part IV describes Chief Justice Burger's analysis in Segura. Part V argues that the Chief …

California V. Ciraolo, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Issuance Of Search Warrants By A Washington Special Inquiry Judge—State V. Neslund, 103 Wn. 2d 79, 690 P.2d 1153 (1984), Alice M. Wright

Washington Law Review

Since its creation in 1971, the Washington special inquiry judge procedure has operated virtually without constitutional challenge. However, the recent case of State v. Neslund raised the issue of whether a special inquiry judge can properly act as a neutral and detached magistrate to issue search warrants. The United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution set forth basic guarantees of privacy and fairness, including the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Generally a "reasonable" search must be accompanied by a search warrant issued upon a determination of probable cause by a neutral and detached magistrate. This …

Issuance Of Search Warrants By A Washington Special Inquiry Judge—State V. Neslund, 103 Wn. 2d 79, 690 P.2d 1153 (1984), Alice M. Wright

Washington Law Review

Since its creation in 1971, the Washington special inquiry judge procedure has operated virtually without constitutional challenge. However, the recent case of State v. Neslund raised the issue of whether a special inquiry judge can properly act as a neutral and detached magistrate to issue search warrants. The United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution set forth basic guarantees of privacy and fairness, including the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Generally a "reasonable" search must be accompanied by a search warrant issued upon a determination of probable cause by a neutral and detached magistrate. This …

Criminal Procedure—Exclusionary Rule—No Good Faith Exception To The Arkansas Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Dale Scroggins

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Road To Exclusion Is Paved With Bad Intentions: A Bad Faith Corollary To The Good Faith Exception, Ronald J. Bacigal

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Two Models Of The Fourth Amendment, Craig M. Bradley

Michigan Law Review

Fourth amendment critics rank in rows, and it has been repeatedly pointed out that individual cases are inconsistent with each other or that whole chunks of doctrine, such as the automobile exception or the plain view exception, are either misconceived, too broad, or too narrow. But these critics all play the Court on its own field, simply arguing as tenth Justices that the doctrines should be tinkered with in different ways than the Court has done. This Article, in contrast, suggests that current fourth amendment law, complete with the constant tinkering which it necessarily entails, should be abandoned altogether. Instead, …

Rejoinder: Truth, Justice, And The American Way--Or Professor Haddad's "Hard Choices", John M. Burkoff

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

I frankly think that Professor Haddad's response to my article on pretext searches is first-rate. It is articulate; it is thoughtful and scholarly; it sharpens the issues and the analysis in this area; and, for the most part, I think his criticisms of various portions of my own work present my positions fairly and honestly. On the other hand, I think that Professor Haddad is dead wrong.

Pretextual Fourth Amendment Activity: Another Viewpoint, James B. Haddad

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Pretextual detentions, arrests, and searches pose knotty fourth amendment problems. With an air of plausibility, defense attorneys often accuse police of pretextual use of arrest warrants, search warrants, and various exceptions to the warrant requirement. Specifically, they contend that officers have utilized a particular fourth amendment doctrine to obtain certain evidence even though courts have not assigned as a reason for approving the doctrine the need to discover such evidence.

The Road To Exclusion Is Paved With Bad Intentions: A Bad Faith Corollary To The Good Faith Exception, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

This Article will demonstrate that a search pursuant to a properly issued warrant may trigger application of the exclusionary rule if: (1) there is police bad faith in delaying execution of the warrant, and (2) such bad faith results in additional intrusions upon individual privacy. Although this Article is limited to a consideration of bad faith in delaying the execution of search warrants, the discussion points the way to application of the concept of bad faith to all aspects of fourth amendment jurisprudence.

Terry Stop Or Arrest? The Washington Court Attempts A Distinction—State V. Williams, 102 Wn. 2d 733, 689 P.2d 1065 (1984), Beryl N. Simpson

Washington Law Review

In State v. Williams the Washington Supreme Court attempted to set forth specific criteria for determining when a temporary detention exceeds the bounds of a Terry stop and becomes an arrest, with the concomitant probable cause requirement. The court relied on both the fourth amendment and article 1, section 7 of the state constitution as the bases for its standards. The holding, however, is fact-specific, and the court's discussion of the permissible scope and intensity of an investigatory stop does not adequately establish guidelines for the police to apply in a future situation. Further, because the court did not ground …

Closing The "Open Fields" Question: Oliver V. United States, Brian K. Jorgensen

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Jacobsen: Expanded Private Search Doctrine Undermining Fourth Amendment Values, Kim A. Lambert

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Tennessee V. Garner: Fourth Amendment Limitations On A Peace Officer's Use Of Deadly Force To Effect An Arrest, Frank P. Tighe Iii

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Property And Personal Privacy: Interrelationship, Abandonment And Confusion In The Path Of Judicial Review, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 847 (1985), Kenneth Mott, Lovette Mott

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And Informational Privacy, Or How So-Called Conservatives Countenance Governmental Intrustion Into A Person's Private Affairs, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 871 (1985), Michael P. Seng

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unreasonable Searches And Seizures Of Papers, Eric Schnapper

Articles

This article argues that the Supreme Court's original view of the history and meaning of the fourth amendment was correct: seizures of papers were condemned in eighteenth-century England without respect to the validity of any underlying warrant, and the search and seizure clause thus embodies requirements independent of the warrant clause.

Part I discusses the eighteenth-century English decisions, including Entick, and concludes that the case law of that era had two separate branches. One branch forbade general warrants and led to the adoption of the warrant clause; the other, exemplified by Entick, prohibited the seizure of certain papers …

Electronic Tracking Devices And The Fourth Amendment: Knotts, Karo, And The Questions Still Unanswered, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

This article will examine the Knotts and Karo decisions, analyze the unanswered questions relating to the use of electronic tracking devices, and outline legislation that might best resolve those questions and strike a proper balance between the often conflicting values of individual privacy and effective law enforcement.

New Jersey V. T.L.O.: The Fourth Amendment Goes To School, 19 J. Marshall L. Rev. 115 (1985), Timothy G. Kelly

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Two Models Of The Fourth Amendment, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.