Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Further Punishing The Wrongfully Accused: Manuel V. City Of Joliet, The Fourth Amendment, And Malicious Prosecution, James R. Holley
Further Punishing The Wrongfully Accused: Manuel V. City Of Joliet, The Fourth Amendment, And Malicious Prosecution, James R. Holley
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
Manuel v. City of Joliet is before the Supreme Court to determine whether detention before trial without probable cause is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, or whether it is merely a violation of the Due Process Clause. Every circuit except the Seventh Circuit treats this type of detention as being a violation of the Fourth Amendment; only the Seventh Circuit considers this question under the Due Process Clause. This commentary argues that the Supreme Court should look to its precedent, which clearly treats pretrial detention without probable cause as being a Fourth Amendment issue, and reverse the Seventh Circuit. …
Justice Scalia’S Originalism And Formalism: The Rule Of Criminal Law As A Law Of Rules, Stephanos Bibas
Justice Scalia’S Originalism And Formalism: The Rule Of Criminal Law As A Law Of Rules, Stephanos Bibas
All Faculty Scholarship
Far too many reporters and pundits collapse law into politics, assuming that the left–right divide between Democratic and Republican appointees neatly explains politically liberal versus politically conservative outcomes at the Supreme Court. The late Justice Antonin Scalia defied such caricatures. His consistent judicial philosophy made him the leading exponent of originalism, textualism, and formalism in American law, and over the course of his three decades on the Court, he changed the terms of judicial debate. Now, as a result, supporters and critics alike start with the plain meaning of the statutory or constitutional text rather than loose appeals to legislative …
Utah V. Strieff And The Future Of The Exceptions To The Exclusionary Rule, Zack Gong
Utah V. Strieff And The Future Of The Exceptions To The Exclusionary Rule, Zack Gong
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
In the recent case State v. Strieff, the Supreme Court of Utah held that police’s discovery of a lawful outstanding warrant during an unlawful investigatory stop cannot save the evidence obtained during that arrest from suppression under the attenuation doctrine. To reach that decision, the court reasoned that the inevitable discovery doctrine, instead of the attenuation doctrine, is appropriate for this situation. However, the court failed to address whether the inevitable discovery doctrine can ultimately save the evidence from suppression.
The theoretical foundation of how the Fourth Amendment guaranty gives rise to the exclusionary rule has never been steadfast; …
Evidence Laundering In A Post-Herring World, Kay L. Levine, Jenia I. Turner, Ronald F. Wright
Evidence Laundering In A Post-Herring World, Kay L. Levine, Jenia I. Turner, Ronald F. Wright
Faculty Articles
The Supreme Court’s decision in Herring v. United States authorizes police to defeat the Fourth Amendment’s protections through a process we call evidence laundering. Evidence laundering occurs when one police officer makes a constitutional mistake when gathering evidence and then passes that evidence along to a second officer, who develops it further and then delivers it to prosecutors for use in a criminal case. The original constitutional taint disappears in the wash.
Courts have allowed evidence laundering in a variety of contexts, from cases involving flawed databases to cases stemming from faulty judgments and communication lapses in law enforcement teams. …
Arbitrary Law Enforcement Is Unreasonable: Whren's Failure To Hold Police Accountable For Traffic Enforcement Policies, Jonathan Witmer-Rich
Arbitrary Law Enforcement Is Unreasonable: Whren's Failure To Hold Police Accountable For Traffic Enforcement Policies, Jonathan Witmer-Rich
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
Whren v. United States is surely a leading contender for the most controversial and heavily criticized Supreme Court case that was decided in a short, unanimous opinion. The slip opinion is only thirteen pages long, and provoked no dissents or even concurring opinions. Critical reaction has been overwhelmingly negative. Criticism not withstanding, the Court has not retreated from Whren, but continues to repeat its core holding.
Part I frames the problem in Whren with a story. Part II sets forth the fundamental Fourth Amendment principle underlying this article—the prohibition against arbitrary search and seizure. Part III explains how arbitrariness …