Law Commons^™

The American Exclusionary Rule Experience, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

When “Special Needs” Meet Probable Cause: Denying The Devil Benefit Of Law, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

Removing laws to pursue the lawbreaker may be well intentioned, but the result is that society is susceptible to the evils those laws protect against. The traditional Fourth Amendment safeguards--probable cause and warrants--have been abandoned due to the development of a reasonableness standard because of the presence of “special needs” that were used to justify searches. The adoption of this alternative approach to Fourth Amendment interpretation was signalled by the truly landmark case of Terry v. Ohio.

By adopting the “reasonableness” analysis, the Supreme Court altered the impact of the exclusionary rule without directly modifying the rule. After Griffin v. …

County Court Of Ulster County V. Allen And Sandstorm V. Montana: The Supreme Court Lends An Ear But Turns Its Face, John M. Schmolesky

Faculty Articles

Because criminal verdicts provide no clue as to how the jury reached its decision, jury instructions are crucial indicators of how a deductive device operates. Deductive devices are mechanisms that allow or require the fact-finder to assume the existence of a fact when proof of other facts are shown. Any deductive device, whether permissive or mandatory, has pernicious possibilities that imperil the rationality of fact-finding. The controlling method of review for deductive devices in criminal cases simply require a rational connection between the basic fact and the presumed fact. However, the Supreme Court in Allen broke new ground in exempting …