Law Commons^™

City Of Los Angeles V. Patel: The Upcoming Supreme Court Case No One Is Talking About, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Focusing solely on whether a hotel owner has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a guest registry is akin to asking whether Verizon Wireless has a reasonable expectation of privacy in its customer lists. The answer to those questions should be yes, but the sixty-four thousand dollar question—and the proverbial elephant in the room—is whether hotel occupants and cell phone users forfeit their privacy rights simply because they check into the Beverly Hills Hotel or call their significant others from a Smart Phone on the Santa Monica Freeway. Put differently, a hotel owner’s expectation of privacy in a guest registry …

City Of Los Angeles V. Patel: The Upcoming Supreme Court Case No One Is Talking About, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Focusing solely on whether a hotel owner has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a guest registry is akin to asking whether Verizon Wireless has a reasonable expectation of privacy in its customer lists. The answer to those questions should be yes, but the sixty-four thousand dollar question—and the proverbial elephant in the room—is whether hotel occupants and cell phone users forfeit their privacy rights simply because they check into the Beverly Hills Hotel or call their significant others from a Smart Phone on the Santa Monica Freeway.

Put differently, a hotel owner’s expectation of privacy in a guest registry …

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Johnson, Denise Shanley

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Critique Of The Second Circuit’S Analysis In Nicholas V. Goord, John Dorsett Niles

University of Massachusetts Law Review

The Case Note proceeds as follows. Part I traces the historical and procedural facts underlying Nicholas. Part II describes the legal backdrop against which the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided the case. Part III steps through the Second Circuit’s majority opinion, and Part IV critiques the opinion. Part V concludes the Case Note by discussing the ramifications of Nicholas for future DNA-indexing cases.

Qualified Immunity In The Fourth Amendment: A Practical Application Of 1983 As It Applies To Fourth Amendment Excessive Force Cases, Karen Blum

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A House Divided: When State And Lower Federal Courts Disagree On Federal Constitutional Rights, Wayne A. Logan

Scholarly Publications

Despite their many differences, Americans have long been bound by a shared sense of federal constitutional commonality. As this article demonstrates, however, federal constitutional rights do in fact often differ — even within individual states — as a result of state and lower federal court concurrent authority to interpret the Constitution and the lack of any requirement that they defer to one another’s positions. The article provides the first in-depth examination of intra-state, state-federal court conflicts on federal constitutional law and the problems that they create. Focusing on criminal procedure doctrine in particular, with its unique impact on individual liberty …

The Internet Is The New Public Forum: Why Riley V. California Supports Net Neutrality, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Technology has ushered civil liberties into the virtual world, and the law must adapt by providing legal protections to individuals who speak, assemble, and associate in that world. The original purposes of the First Amendment, which from time immemorial have protected civil liberties and preserved the free, open, and robust exchange of information, support net neutrality. After all, laws or practices that violate cherished freedoms in the physical world also violate those freedoms in the virtual world. The battle over net neutrality is “is absolutely the First Amendment issue of our time,” just as warrantless searches of cell phones were …

Summary Of Byars V. State, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 85, Katherine Frank

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) pursuant to Missouri v. McNeely[1], the natural dissipation of marijuana in the blood stream does not constitute a per se exigent circumstance permitting a warrantless blood draw, (2) NRS 484C.160(7)[2], which allows officers to use force to obtain blood samples, violates the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution[3], and (3) when a warrantless blood draw is nonetheless taken in good faith, evidence obtained from the blood draw is admissible at trial.

The Fatal Flaws Of The 'Sneak And Peek' Statute And How To Fix It, Jonathan Witmer-Rich

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In the USA PATRIOT Act, Congress authorized delayed notice search warrants — warrants authorizing a “sneak and peek” search, in which investigators conduct covert searches, notifying the occupant weeks or months after the search. These warrants also sometimes authorize covert seizures — a “sneak and steal” search — in which investigators seize evidence, often staging the scene to look like a burglary.

Covert searches invade the privacy of the home and should be used only in exceptional cases. The current legal rules governing delayed notice search warrants are conceptually flawed. The statute uses a legal doctrine — “exigent circumstances” — …

Minding Your Meds: Balancing The Needs For Patient Privacy And Law Enforcement In Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs, Devon T. Unger

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Riley V. California: Privacy Still Matters, But How Much And In What Contexts?, Adam Lamparello, Charles E. Maclean

Adam Lamparello

Private information is no longer stored only in homes or other areas traditionally protected from warrantless intrusion. The private lives of many citizens are contained in digital devices no larger than the palm of their hand—and carried in public places. But that does not make the data within a cell phone any less private, just as the dialing of a phone number does not voluntarily waive an individual’s right to keep their call log or location private. Remember that we are not talking exclusively about individuals suspected of committing violent crimes. The Government is recording the calls and locations of …

Riley V. California: What It Means For Metadata, Border Searches, And The Future Of Privacy, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Private information is no longer stored only in homes or other areas traditionally protected from warrantless intrusion. The private lives of many citizens are contained in a digital device no larger than the palm of their hand—and carried in public places. But that does not make the data within a cell phone any less private, just as the dialing of a phone number does not voluntarily waive an individual’s right to keep their call log or location private. Remember that we are not talking about individuals suspected of committing violent crimes. The Government is recording the calls and locations of …

United States V. Jones: Big Brother And The "Common Good" Versus The Fourth Amendment And Your Right To Privacy, Melanie Reid

Tennessee Journal of Law and Policy

In the center of the town of Siena, Italy, lays the Palazzo Publico which was built between 1297 and 1310. Inside the Palazzo Publico is the Sala della Pace, the Hall of Peace, which houses an early piece of Italian secular arta fresco that illustrates the effect government has on the city, its people, and the countryside.' The painter, Ambrogio Lorenzetti, depicted the "Common Good" as a king, sitting tall and strong above a line of smaller-sized, everyday people who are slowly making their way towards the "Common Good." This picture represents the subordination of private interest to the common …

Brief Of Amici Curiae -- Heien V. State Of North Carolina, Charles E. Maclean, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity cannot be predicated on conduct that does not violate the law. Put differently, if reasonableness — or reasonable suspicion — is to mean anything, it means that apparent violations of the law must be based on actual violations of the law. The North Carolina Supreme Court’s decision sends a message to drivers throughout the country that they cannot be wrong about what the law requires, even where law enforcement is wrong — dead wrong — about what the law proscribes.

Arrestee Number Two, Who Are You? Suspicionless Dna Testing Of Pre-Trial Arrestees And The Fourth Amendment Implications, Lesley A. Hall

Missouri Law Review

This Note discusses the resolution of that constitutional battle, Maryland v. King, where the U.S. Supreme Court held that DNA testing of pre-trial arrestees was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment as a routine booking procedure. The Court also held that DNA testing’s use for arrestee identification permitted its use as a tool to investigate suspicionless crimes. Part II analyzes the facts and holding of Maryland v. King. Part III discusses Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, including court-established tests used to ascertain whether a particular search is reasonable. Part IV examines the United States Supreme Court’s rationale in King, including Justice Scalia’s dissent, …

The Case For Rational Basis Review Of General Suspicionless Searches And Seizures, Richard C. Worf

Touro Law Review

This article examines the constitutional status of suspicionless searches and seizures of groups- an exceedingly important question in the age of terror, and a subject recently brought back to the forefront by the searches of subway passengers in New York City. It draws on process theory to argue that when a legislature has authorized a group search or seizure, courts should generally apply rational basis review.

First, other areas of constitutional doctrine exhibit deep trust in the power of groups to protect their interests in political process, and there is no reason why fourth amendment doctrine should not do the …

Supreme Court, New York County, People V. Smith, Jessica Miller

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, First Department, Koeiman V. New York, Gennaro Savastano

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Burton, Diane Matero

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Moore, Gennaro Savastano

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Privacy In Social Media: To Tweet Or Not To Tweet?, Tara M. Breslawski

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

It's Reasonable To Expect Privacy When Watching Adult Videos, Matthew Leonhardt

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fourth Amendment Right To Privacy With Respect To Bank Records In Criminal Cases, Francesca M. Brancato

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

You Do Not Have The Right To Remain Drunk: Expanding The Scope Of Implied Consent Through Fifth Amendment Voluntariness Standards, Avi Goldstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

You Have The Right To Be Free From Unwanted Bodily Intrusion--Unless Of Course There Is A Court Order, Tara Laterza

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Blueprint: Critiques Of The Fingerprint And Abandonment Paradigms Utilized To Reject An Expectation Of Privacy In Dna, Avi Goldstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Locked Glove Compartments: Searchable Or Stash Spots?, Evan Levtow

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Delayed Search Of An Automobile Makes For An Unconstitutional Seizure, Sean J. Mcgowan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stripped Bare: Students' Fourth Amendment Rights, School Searches, And The Reasonableness Standard, Erin P. Davenport

Tennessee Journal of Law and Policy

In Beard v. Whitmore Lake School District,' the Sixth Circuit examined whether the law governing searches of students, specifically strip searches, was clearly established and deprived school officials of qualified immunity. The Sixth Circuit first evaluated the strip search's constitutionality under the Fourth Amendment. Then, the Sixth Circuit addressed whether qualified immunity protected school officials. Beard demonstrates that students' Fourth Amendment rights receive less protection than teachers' liability and could result in students shedding "their constitutional rights at the school house gate." With violence and drug use on the rise in schools, courts consider students' constitutional rights less important than …

Brief For The National Association Of Social Workers And The Ohio Chapter Of The National Association Of Social Workers As Amici Curie In Support Of Petitioners, No. 13-933, United States Supreme Court (Mar. 6, 2014), Doron M. Kalir, Carolyn I. Polowy

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

NASW's first argument is simple. To protect children from abuse - a major congressional and state legislative goal - this Court should apply qualified immunity to protect social workers from personal liability where a reasonable decision has been made to remove a child without a warrant.

NASW's second argument is equally cogent. DeShaney was decided 25 years ago. Since then, this Court's "continued silence" on the issue, Kovacic, 724 F.3d at 708 (Sutton, J., dissenting), has failed "to provide guidance to those charged with the difficult task of protecting child welfare within the confines of the Fourth Amendment." Camreta v. …