Law Commons^™

Revising Reasonableness In The Cloud, Ian Walsh

Washington Law Review

Save everything—just in case––and search for it later. This is a modern mantra fueled by the ubiquity of smartphones, laptops, tablets, and free or low-cost data storage that leads users to store massive amounts of data in the cloud. But when users trust third-party cloud storage providers with private communications, they also surrender Fourth Amendment constitutional certainty. Existing statutory safeguards for these communications are lower than Fourth Amendment warrant and probable cause standards; this permits the government to seize large quantities of users’ private communications stored in the cloud with only minimal justification. Due to the revealing nature of such …

Suspects, Cars & Police Dogs: A Complicated Relationship, Brian R. Gallini

Washington Law Review

Officers are searching and arresting vehicle occupants without a warrant with increasing regularity. For justification, this Article demonstrates, lower courts across the country unconstitutionally expand the scope of the Fourth Amendment’s automobile exception—often in the context of a positive dog alert. But Supreme Court jurisprudence specifically limits the scope of the automobile exception to warrantless searches of cars and their containers. In other words, the probable cause underlying the automobile exception allows police to search a vehicle and its containers—nothing more.

Despite that clear guidance, this Article argues that a growing number of lower courts nationwide unconstitutionally rely on the …

Constitutional Law: Search And Seizure—The Role Of Police Officer Good Faith In Substantive Fourth Amendment Doctrine—Michigan V. De Fillippo, 443, U.S. 31 (1979), Richard E. Gifford

Washington Law Review

This note challenges the Court's implicit assumption that a policeman's good faith reliance is relevant in determining whether the fourth amendment has been violated. That assumption is incompatible with precedent. Prior decisions suggest good faith reliance should not be considered until after the court has established that a violation occurred and applicability of the exclusionary rule is at issue. Without offering a coherent explanation for its departure from precedent, the DeFillippo Court casually added police good faith to the already complex body of substantive search and seizure law. Thus, the decision created yet another dimension of disquieting uncertainty in the …

Criminal Procedure—Luggage Found During A Lawful Warrantless Search Of An Automobile May Not Be Searched Without A Warrant—Arkansas V. Sanders, 442 U.S. 753 (1979), Suzanne Oliver

Washington Law Review

In Arkansas v. Sanders, the U.S. Supreme Court held that in the absence of exigent circumstances, police must obtain a warrant before searching luggage taken from an automobile lawfully stopped and searched for contraband. The majority opinion, written by Justice Powell, sharply restricts further extension of the "automobile exception" to the warrant requirement of the fourth amendment. The Court found the exception inapplicable for two reasons. First, a suitcase in the custody of police lacks the inherent mobility of an automobile. Second, there is a much greater expectation of privacy associated with luggage than is associated with a car. A …

Criminal Law—Search Incident To An Arrest, Hayes Elder

Washington Law Review

In a recent case, State v. Michaels, the Washington Supreme Court announced a new rule for search and seizure incident to an arrest: the purpose of the arrest circumscribes the area and nature of the search.

Constitutionality Of A Search And Seizure, Without Warrant, Of An Automobile—Reasonable Cause—Anonymous Tips, Sherman R. Huffine

Washington Law Review

Since the case of Carroll v. United States, it has become a generally recognized principle of law that an officer may make a search and seizure of an automobile without a warrant, provided that the officer has probable cause to make the search. The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States specifically is aimed to protect the people against "unreasonable searches and seizures." The Carroll case is based on the theory that if the other has probable cause the search of an automobile is not an unreasonable search. The distinction drawn is that while the warrant can easily …