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

Law Commons

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

2012

Fourth Amendment

Northern Illinois University

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Pawing Their Way To The Supreme Court: The Evidence Required To Prove A Narcotic Detection Dog's Reliability, Monica Fazekas Jun 2012

Pawing Their Way To The Supreme Court: The Evidence Required To Prove A Narcotic Detection Dog's Reliability, Monica Fazekas

Northern Illinois University Law Review

Historically, courts have given great deference to the anatomical scent detectors from which the canine’s heightened sense of smell derives. In 2005, the Supreme Court supported this position and held that a drug detection dog’s sniff did not constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment. The Court partially based its reasoning on the classification of the dog sniff as sui generis. With this holding, courts began admitting evidence of a drug detection dog’s alert to narcotics to constitute the requisite probable cause for an officer’s search. Virtually every circuit allows a canine alert to establish such probable cause by presenting …


Watching The Watchmen: The People's Attempt To Hold On-Duty Law Enforcement Officers Accountable For Misconduct And The Illinois Law That Stands In Their Way, Robert J. Tomei Jr. Apr 2012

Watching The Watchmen: The People's Attempt To Hold On-Duty Law Enforcement Officers Accountable For Misconduct And The Illinois Law That Stands In Their Way, Robert J. Tomei Jr.

Northern Illinois University Law Review

In the days when police brutality and public official corruption pump through the veins of society as a fermenting virus, a critical analysis of a controversial law curtailing efforts to intensify public awareness of government official transgressions is undertaken. In the great State of Illinois, legislative amendments to the Illinois Eavesdropping Act have established a moratorium on the audio recording, without prior consent, of any judge, state's attorney or law enforcement officer while in the performance of his or her official duties, regardless of whether or not the public official(s) had any objective, justifiable or reasonable expectation of privacy when …