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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Reconsideration Of The Katz Expectation Of Privacy Test, Michigan Law Review Nov 1977

Reconsideration Of The Katz Expectation Of Privacy Test, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note, by modifying certain aspects of the reasonable expectation of privacy test, offers a theory that attempts to identify the minimum content of the fourth amendment. In the first section, the Note examines the reasonable expectation of privacy test and considers whether it has been or can be applied in a manner that fails to protect the right to have certain minimum expectations of privacy. It analyzes both the "actual" and the "reasonable" expectation requirements, identifies weaknesses inherent in the current application of these requirements, and suggests certain ways in which they might be refined. In the second section, …


Juvenile Curfew Ordinances And The Constitution, Michigan Law Review Nov 1977

Juvenile Curfew Ordinances And The Constitution, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Recognizing that a legislature must decide whether to enact a juvenile curfew without the benefit of conclusive data on the effectiveness of such laws, the remainder of this Note will focus primarily upon the constitutional issues raised by such ordinances. The freedom of movement that is limited by a curfew is, it will be argued, an unenumerated right protected by the ninth and fourteenth amendments. The constitutional rights of juveniles, however, -are not necessarily coextensive with those of adults. Certain characteristics of juveniles-in particular, their lesser capacity for reason and self-control-imply that the strength of their right to freedom of …


The Life And Times Of Boyd V. United States (1886-1976), Michigan Law Review Nov 1977

The Life And Times Of Boyd V. United States (1886-1976), Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

In Boyd v. United States, the Supreme Court held that the fourth and fifth amendments create a zone of privacy encompassing an individual's person and property. The government, according to Boyd, cannot enter this zone, either by compelling an individual to testify against himself or by subpoenaing or seizing his books and papers for use as evidence against him in a criminal or quasi-criminal proceeding. The Court found an "intimate relation" between the two amendments such that the search and seizure of books and papers may be "unreasonable" even if conducted pursuant to a court order.

Over time, …