Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Corporate integrity agreements (2)
- DNA evidence (2)
- Fourth Amendment (2)
- Health care fraud (2)
- Pharmaceutical (2)
-
- Probable cause (2)
- White collar crime (2)
- Arrest (1)
- Chimerism (1)
- Corporate attorney-client privilege (1)
- Crime-fraud exception (1)
- DNA databases (1)
- Exclusion (1)
- False exonerations (1)
- Material witness statutes (1)
- Off-label promotion (1)
- Pretext (1)
- Search and seizure (1)
- Special needs exception (1)
- Witness detention (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Chimeric Criminals, David H. Kaye
Chimeric Criminals, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
According to the book Genetic Justice: DNA Databanks, Criminal Investigations, and Civil Liberties — described as “the single most comprehensive articulation of the civil-liberties concerns associated with law-enforcement DNA databases,” “a series of measured arguments,” and “a touchstone for debates about the spread of DNA profiling” — an obscure genetic condition known as chimerism “could undermine the very basis of the forensic DNA system” and force a reconsideration of “the entire project of forensic DNA.” This conclusion is as unfounded as it is unnerving. Chimerism is a consideration in, but not a real obstacle to DNA identification. This essay explains …
Drawing Lines: Unrelated Probable Cause As A Prerequisite To Early Dna Collection, David H. Kaye
Drawing Lines: Unrelated Probable Cause As A Prerequisite To Early Dna Collection, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
Swabbing the inside of a cheek has become part of the custodial arrest process in many jurisdictions. The majority view (thus far) is that routinely collecting DNA before conviction (and analyzing it, recording the results, and comparing them to DNA profiles from crime-scene databases) is consistent with Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, some judges and commentators have argued that DNA sampling in advance of a determination by a judge or grand jury of probable cause for the arrest or charge is unconstitutional. This essay shows that this demand is largely unfounded. Either warrantless, suspicionless DNA collection …
Camreta And Al-Kidd: The Supreme Court, The Fourth Amendment, And Witnesses, Kit Kinports
Camreta And Al-Kidd: The Supreme Court, The Fourth Amendment, And Witnesses, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
Although few noticed the link between them, two Supreme Court cases decided in the same week last Term, Ashcroft v. al-Kidd and Camreta v. Greene, both involved the Fourth Amendment implications of detaining witnesses to a crime. Al-Kidd, an American citizen, was arrested under the federal material witness statute in connection with an investigation into terrorist activities, and Greene, a nine-year-old suspected victim of child abuse, was seized and interrogated at school by two state officials. The opinions issued in the two cases did little to resolve the constitutional issues that arise in witness detention cases, and in fact …
Enforcing Integrity, Katrice Bridges Copeland
Enforcing Integrity, Katrice Bridges Copeland
Journal Articles
Over the past several years, the marketing practices of large pharmaceutical companies have come under intense scrutiny. The government spends years investigating and building cases against pharmaceutical manufacturers that engage in illegal promotional activities to promote their drugs but does not prosecute them. Instead, the government enters into Corporate Integrity Agreements (CIAs) with the pharmaceutical giants. As a result, the pharmaceutical manufacturers are able to avoid the collateral consequences of conviction, such as exclusion from Medicare and Medicaid. Participation in Medicare and Medicaid is crucial for a pharmaceutical manufacturer because the government spends over $60 Billion per year through those …
In-House Counsel Beware!, Katrice Bridges Copeland
In-House Counsel Beware!, Katrice Bridges Copeland
Journal Articles
This Article argues that the prosecution of Lauren Stevens for covering up the alleged crimes of GSK was misguided both as a matter of law and a matter of policy. In particular, this Article contends that the government should not prosecute attorneys for obstruction of justice or other cover-up crimes for actions taken in good faith during a government investigation into a client's conduct. Part I provides background on the Lauren Stevens case and the convergence of the four prosecution trends that led the government to indict her. Part II argues that Lauren Stevens did not obstruct the government's investigation …