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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 21 of 21

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Origins And Legacy Of The Fourth Amendment Reasonableness Balancing Model, Kit Kinports Jan 2020

The Origins And Legacy Of The Fourth Amendment Reasonableness Balancing Model, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

The overwhelming majority of the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment cases over the past fifty years have been resolved using a warrant presumption model, which determines the constitutionality of a search or seizure by asking whether law enforcement officials had probable cause and a warrant, or some exception to those requirements. But three decisions, beginning in 2001, mysteriously deviated from that approach and applied a reasonableness balancing model, upholding the searches in those cases after considering the totality of the circumstances and weighing the competing government interests against the defendant’s privacy interests. This balancing approach has justifiably been criticized ...


Illegal Predicate Searches And Tainted Warrants After Heien And Strieff, Kit Kinports Jan 2018

Illegal Predicate Searches And Tainted Warrants After Heien And Strieff, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

A long-standing debate has surrounded the relationship between two features of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule - the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine and the good-faith exception - in cases where the evidence used to secure a search warrant was obtained in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights. Some judges and scholars maintain that the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine takes precedence in such "tainted warrant" cases, leading to the suppression of any evidence seized in executing the warrant unless the warrant was supported by probable cause independent of the illegal predicate search. By contrast, others believe that ...


The Supreme Court's Quiet Expansion Of Qualified Immunity, Kit Kinports Jan 2016

The Supreme Court's Quiet Expansion Of Qualified Immunity, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

This Essay discusses the Supreme Court’s tendency in recent opinions to covertly expand the reach of the qualified immunity defense available to public officials in § 1983 civil rights suits. In particular, the Essay points out that the Court, often in per curiam rulings, has described qualified immunity in increasingly broad terms and has qualified and retreated from its precedents, without offering any explanation or even acknowledging that it is deviating from past practice.

In making this claim, I focus on three specific issues: the manner in which the Court characterizes the standard governing the qualified immunity defense; the question ...


Heien'S Mistake Of Law, Kit Kinports Jan 2016

Heien'S Mistake Of Law, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

The Supreme Court has been whittling away at the Fourth Amendment for decades. The Court's 2014 ruling in Heien v. North Carolina allowing the police to make a traffic stop based on a reasonable mistake of law generated little controversy among the Justices and escaped largely unnoticed by the press-perhaps because yet another Supreme Court decision reading the Fourth Amendment narrowly is not especially noteworthy or because the opinion's cursory and overly simplistic analysis equating law enforcement's reasonable mistakes of fact and law minimized the significance of the Court's decision. But the temptation to dismiss Heien ...


Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports Jan 2014

Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion: Totality Tests Or Rigid Rules?, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

This piece argues that the Supreme Court's April 2014 decision in Navarette v. Calfornia, like last Term's opinion in Florida v. Harris, deviates from longstanding Supreme Court precedent treating probable cause and reasonable suspicion as totality-of-the-circumstances tests. Instead, these two recent rulings essentially rely on rigid rules to define probable cause and reasonable suspicion. The article criticizes the Court for selectively endorsing bright-line tests that favor the prosecution, and argues that both decisions generate rules that oversimplify and therefore tend to be overinclusive.


On The 'Considered Analysis' Of Collecting Dna Before Conviction, David H. Kaye Jan 2013

On The 'Considered Analysis' Of Collecting Dna Before Conviction, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

For nearly a decade, DNA-on-arrest laws eluded scrutiny in the courts. For another five years, they withstood a gathering storm of constitutional challenges. In Maryland v. King, however, Maryland's highest court reasoned that usually fingerprints provide everything police need to establish the true identity of an individual before trial and that the state's interest in finding the perpetrators of crimes by trawling databases of DNA profiles is too "generalized" to support "a warrantless, suspicionless search." The U.S. Supreme Court reacted forcefully. Chief Justice Roberts stayed the Maryland judgment, writing that "given the considered analysis of courts on ...


Maryland V. King: Per Se Unreasonableness, The Golden Rule, And The Future Of Dna Databases, David H. Kaye Jan 2013

Maryland V. King: Per Se Unreasonableness, The Golden Rule, And The Future Of Dna Databases, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court applied a balancing test to uphold a Maryland statute mandating preconviction collection and analysis of DNA from individuals charged with certain crimes. The DNA profiles are limited to an inherited set of DNA sequences that are not known to be functional and that are tokens of individual identity. This invited online essay examines two aspects of an article on the case by Professor Erin Murphy. I question the claim that the case is pivotal in a conceivable abandonment of the per se rule that warrantless, suspicionless searches are unconstitutional unless they fall within ...


Pass Parallel Privacy Standards Or Privacy Perishes, Anne T. Mckenna Jan 2013

Pass Parallel Privacy Standards Or Privacy Perishes, Anne T. Mckenna

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.


The Dog Days Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports Jan 2013

The Dog Days Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

This Article discusses Florida v. Harris and Florida v. Jardines, the two Fourth Amendment drug dog opinions issued by the Supreme Court earlier this year. Together the cases hold that a narcotics detection dog effects a “search” when it intrudes on a constitutionally protected area in order to collect evidence, but that the dog’s positive alert is generally sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. The piece argues that both cases essentially generate a bright-line rule, thereby deviating from precedent that favored a more amorphous standard considering all the surrounding circumstances. Like many purportedly clear rules, the ones ...


Culpability, Deterrence, And The Exclusionary Rule, Kit Kinports Jan 2013

Culpability, Deterrence, And The Exclusionary Rule, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

This Article discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the concepts of culpability and deterrence in its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, in particular, in the opinions applying the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The contemporary Court sees deterrence as the exclusionary rule’s sole function, and the Article begins by taking the Court at its word, evaluating its exclusionary rule case law on its own terms. Drawing on three different theories of deterrence – economic rational choice theory, organizational theory, and the expressive account of punishment – the Article analyzes the mechanics by which the exclusionary rule deters unconstitutional searches and questions ...


Camreta And Al-Kidd: The Supreme Court, The Fourth Amendment, And Witnesses, Kit Kinports Jan 2012

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 muddied ...


Unraveling The Exclusionary Rule: From Leon To Herring To Robinson - And Back?, David H. Kaye Jan 2011

Unraveling The Exclusionary Rule: From Leon To Herring To Robinson - And Back?, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule began to unravel in United States v. Leon. The facts were compelling. Why exclude reliable physical evidence from trial when it was not the constable who blundered, but “a detached and neutral magistrate” who misjudged whether probable cause was present and issued a search warrant? Later cases applied the exception for “good faith” mistakes to a police officer who, pursuing a grudge against a suspect, arrested and searched him and his truck on the basis of a false and negligent report from a clerk in another county of an outstand­ing arrest warrant. The California ...


Dna Database Trawls And The Definition Of A Search In Boroian V. Mueller, David H. Kaye Jan 2011

Dna Database Trawls And The Definition Of A Search In Boroian V. Mueller, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

As a general matter, once the government acquires information from a permissible search or seizure, it can use this information in later criminal investigations. Courts have applied this simple rule to uphold the indefinite reuse of DNA samples acquired from convicted offenders. This essay describes the First Circuit Court of Appeals’ reliance on the rule in rejecting a convicted offender’s claim that his DNA sample and profile had to be removed from the federal DNA databank after he completed his sentence. Acknowledging that the rule permitting reuse should not be applied mechanically, I argue that the rule's application ...


Veteran Police Officers And Three-Dollar Steaks: The Subjective/Objective Dimensions Of Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion, Kit Kinports Jan 2010

Veteran Police Officers And Three-Dollar Steaks: The Subjective/Objective Dimensions Of Probable Cause And Reasonable Suspicion, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

This Article addresses two issues surrounding probable cause and reasonable suspicion that test the line between subjective and objective standards in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence: the extent to which a particular police officer’s training and experience ought to be considered in measuring probable cause and reasonable suspicion, and the relevance of the officer’s subjective beliefs about the presence of a weapon in assessing the reasonable suspicion required to justify a frisk. Although both questions have split the lower courts and remain unresolved by the Supreme Court, the majority of courts treat them inconsistently, recognizing the importance of an officer ...


Diminishing Probable Cause And Minimalist Searches, Kit Kinports Jan 2009

Diminishing Probable Cause And Minimalist Searches, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

This paper comments on recent Supreme Court opinions that have used phrases such as "reasonable belief" and "reason to believe" when analyzing intrusions that generally require proof of probable cause. Historically, the Court used these terms as shorthand references for both probable cause and reasonable suspicion. While this lack of precision was unobjectionable when the concepts were interchangeable, that has not been true since Terry v. Ohio created a distinction between the two standards. When the Justices then resurrect these terms without situating them in the dichotomy between probable cause and reasonable suspicion, it is not clear whether they are ...


Criminal Procedure In Perspective, Kit Kinports Jan 2008

Criminal Procedure In Perspective, Kit Kinports

Journal Articles

This Article attempts to situate the Supreme Court's constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence in the academic debates surrounding the reasonable person standard, in particular, the extent to which objective standards should incorporate a particular individual's subjective characteristics. Analyzing the Supreme Court's search and seizure and confessions opinions, I find that the Court shifts opportunistically from case to case between subjective and objective tests, and between whose point of view - the police officer's or the defendant's - it views as controlling. Moreover, these deviations cannot be explained either by the principles the Court claims underlie the various constitutional ...


Dna Identification Databases: Legality, Legitimacy, And The Case For Population-Wide Coverage, David H. Kaye, Michael E. Smith Jan 2003

Dna Identification Databases: Legality, Legitimacy, And The Case For Population-Wide Coverage, David H. Kaye, Michael E. Smith

Journal Articles

Over the past decade, law enforcement authorities have amassed huge collections of DNA samples and the identifying profiles derived from them. Large DNA databanks routinely help to identify the guilty and to exonerate the innocent, but as the databanks grow, so do fears about civil liberties. Perhaps the most controversial policy issue in the creation of these databases is the question of coverage: Whose DNA profiles should be stored in them? The possibilities extend from convicted violent sex offenders to all convicted felons, to everyone arrested, to the entire population. This Article questions the rationales for drawing the line at ...


Dna Typing: Emerging Or Neglected Issues, David H. Kaye, Edward J. Imwinkelried Jan 2001

Dna Typing: Emerging Or Neglected Issues, David H. Kaye, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Journal Articles

DNA typing has had a major impact on the criminal justice system. There are hundreds of opinions and thousands of cases dealing with DNA evidence. Yet, at virtually every stage of the process, there are important issues that are just emerging or that have been neglected.

At the investigative stage, courts have barely begun to focus on the legal limitations on the power of the police to obtain samples directly from suspects and to use the data from DNA samples in various ways. Issues such as the propriety of "DNA dragnets" (in which large numbers of individuals in a geographic ...


The Constitutionality Of Dna Sampling On Arrest, David H. Kaye Jan 2001

The Constitutionality Of Dna Sampling On Arrest, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

Every state now collects DNA from people convicted of certain offenses. Law enforcement authorities promote offender DNA databanking on the theory that it will identify offenders who commit additional crimes while or probation or parole, or after they have finished serving their sentences. Even relatively small databases have yielded such dividends. As these database searches uncover the perpetrators of rapes, murders, and other offenses, the pressure builds to expand the coverage of the databases.

Recent proposals call for extending not merely the scope of crimes for which DNA databanking would be used, but also the point at which the samples ...


The Domestic Fourth Amendment Rights Of Undocumented Immigrants: On Guitterez And The Tort Law/Immigration Law Parallel, Victor C. Romero Jan 2000

The Domestic Fourth Amendment Rights Of Undocumented Immigrants: On Guitterez And The Tort Law/Immigration Law Parallel, Victor C. Romero

Journal Articles

This Article is composed of three parts. Part I examines the problems raised by the Gutierrez I regime, including the collapse of the protective constitutional floor of immigrants' rights portended by that decision. Part II contends that the current plenary power approach to immigration and immigrants' rights issues would likely support, rather than dismantle, the Gutierrez I approach to undocumented immigrants' Fourth Amendment rights. Part III provides an alternative to the plenary power regime by drawing a parallel between domestic tort law for premises liability and immigrants' rights law. This part concludes by showing that Rowland and its progeny could ...


Whatever Happened To The Fourth Amendment: Undocumented Immigrants' Rights After Ins V. Lopenz-Mendoza And United States V. Verdugo-Urquidez, Victor C. Romero Jan 1992

Whatever Happened To The Fourth Amendment: Undocumented Immigrants' Rights After Ins V. Lopenz-Mendoza And United States V. Verdugo-Urquidez, Victor C. Romero

Journal Articles

This Note rejects the Court's approach to the Fourth Amendment in Lopez and Verdugo and attempts to redefine the boundaries of Fourth Amendment protections for undocumented immigrants. Part I examines the impact of the Lopez and Verdugo decisions upon undocumented immigrants' Fourth Amendment rights. Part II evaluates the arguments for extending Fourth Amendment protections to undocumented immigrants. Viewing the Fourth Amendment as a restriction on government intrusion, Part III examines the constitutional remedies available to undocumented immigrants. This part rejects the Lopez restrictions on the applicability of the exclusionary rule and concludes that the Fourth Amendment neither draws distinctions ...