Law Commons^™

Rulifying Reasonable Expectations: Why Judicial Tests, Not Originalism, Create A More Determinate Fourth Amendment, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

For decades, commentators have decried the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment search jurisprudence as a hopelessly confusing jumble. Critics save their harshest barbs for the judicially created “reasonable expectations of privacy” test, suggesting that it provides little guidance and leaves search cases open to wide judicial discretion. Motivated by such critiques, several Justices have recently claimed that an originalist approach could replace the reasonable expectations test, limit judicial discretion, and clarify the Fourth Amendment’s meaning.

This Article provides a comprehensive defense of the reasonable expectations test against originalist calls to abandon it. It notes two flaws in the originalist response. First, …

Symposium: Pandemics And The Constitution: Pandemic Surveillance - The New Predictive Policing, Michael Gentithes, Harold J. Krent

ConLawNOW

As the fight against the coronavirus pandemic continues, state governments are considering more invasive surveillance to determine who has been exposed to the virus and who is most likely to catch the virus in the future. Widespread efforts to test temperatures have been initiated; calls for contact tracing have increased; and plans have been revealed to allow only those testing positive for the virus’s antibodies (who presumably now are immune) to return to work and travel. Such fundamental liberties may now hinge on the mere probabilities that one may catch the disease or be immune from it.

To assess the …

Symposium: Pandemics And The Constitution: Why The Special Needs Doctrine Is The Most Appropriate Fourth Amendment Theory For Justifying Police Stops To Enforce Covid-19 Stay-At-Home Orders, Henry F. Fradella

ConLawNOW

Despite the fact that the steps the federal and state governments take to curtail the spread of the viral infection are presumably taken in the best interest of public health, governmental actions and actors must comply with the U.S. Constitution even during a pandemic. Some public health measures, such as stay-at-home orders, restrict the exercise of personal freedoms ranging from the rights to travel and freely associate to the ability to gather in places of worship for religious services. This Essay explores several completing doctrines that might justify the authority of law enforcement to stop people who are out of …

Hash It Out: Fourth Amendment Protection Of Electronically Stored Child Exploitation, Rebekah A. Branham

Akron Law Review

Few courts have addressed whether ISP’s use of hash-based evaluation violates an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights. In 2018, the Fifth Circuit was presented with this issue in United States v. Reddick. The defendant is Reddick uploaded files to the cloud-sharing server Microsoft SkyDrive. Thereafter PhotoDNA, a computer software program that uses hashing, automatically reviewed the hash values of those files and compared them against its database of known child pornography hash values. PhotoDNA detected a hash value match between the defendant’s photos and the database. It then created a “CyberTip,” sending the files and users information to the NCMEC. …

A Look At The Fourth Amendment Implications Of Drone Surveillance By Law Enforcement Today, Mary Mara

ConLawNOW

This paper will examine the current state of drone technology and its increasing prevalence in private and public settings. As police agencies seek to incorporate this new technology into their crime-fighting arsenal, serious Fourth Amendment privacy considerations arise. Although a national debate rages in this country about the impact of modern technology on privacy rights, Congress, the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), and the Supreme Court have yet to weigh in on the Fourth Amendment implications of warrantless drone surveillance by law enforcement. Furthermore, while some states have attempted to step into the breach by passing legislation which limits the use …

United States V. Markham: The Attack On The Drug War Becomes An Attack On The Fourth Amendment, Lee A. Schaffer

Akron Law Review

In United States v. Markham, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit expanded the exception even further when it upheld the validity of a warrantless search of a mobile home parked in a private residential driveway.

This casenote will review the history behind the fourth amendment's warrant requirement and the development of the automobile exception. Next, it will examine the Supreme Court's decision in Carney to evaluate the sixth circuit's application of the automobile exception in Markham, and the court's ruling that a warrantless search and seizure of a motor home parked in the driveway …

The Search For The Fourth Amendment Seizure: It Won't Be Found On A Bus - Florida V. Bostick, James Spallino Jr.

Akron Law Review

The Florida v. Bostick decision raises important Fourth Amendment questions regarding police encounters with citizens.

Part I of this Note discusses the development of the legal standard used for determining when a consensual encounter results in an impermissible seizure. Part II reviews the Bostick decision. Part III analyzes the impact of the Bostick decision. This section argues that: (1) the status of the legal standard to be used in consensual encounter cases is now uncertain as a result of the Court's holding; (2) the Court sent a strong message to individuals and the law enforcement community by refusing to decide …

Another Casualty Of The War . . . Vagrancy Laws Target The Fourth Amendment, T. Leigh Anenson

Akron Law Review

This Comment will review the origins of the vagrancy law and its traditional abuses. It will then examine decisions discussing the vagrancy law's constitutionality under the Due Process clause void-for-vagueness doctrine and the courts' attempted remedy of explicit standards as to place, scope, or purpose. The remainder of this Comment will discuss the constitutionality of these revised vagrancy laws under the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable seizures.

The Shift Of The Balance Of Advantage In Criminal Litigation: The Case Of Mr. Simpson, David Robinson Jr.

Akron Law Review

The intense public interest in the extraordinary trial and acquittal of Mr. O.J. Simpson provides an appropriate occasion to look at the criminal justice system more generally, to note where we have been in the balance of advantage between prosecution and defense, where we are now, and where, perhaps, we should be.

Atwater V. City Of Largo Vista: Buckle-Up Or Get Locked-Up: Warrantless Arrests For Fine-Only Misdemeanors Under The Fourth Amendment, Jason M. Katz

Akron Law Review

The first part of this note presents a brief background of the constitutional jurisprudence regarding arrests. The note then recites the facts that led to this case and the legal proceedings that followed, including the Supreme Court’s decision. Next, the note analyzes the Court’s majority opinion, remarks on changes and deviations that were made in the law, and questions some areas of the Court’s analysis. The note concludes by addressing the significant consequences that the Atwater ruling may have on ordinary Americans.

Overgeneralization Of The Hot Pursuit Doctrine Provides Another Blow To The Fourth Amendment In Middletown V. Flinchum, Nathan Vaughn

Akron Law Review

Unreasonable searches of the home have often been regarded as a serious infringement upon one’s right to privacy. The right to privacy is currently recognized by a variety of governments and has existed for hundreds of years. Although the Constitution does not grant an express right to privacy, the Supreme Court has consistently acknowledged the rights of personal privacy and zones of privacy. Affording extra protection to the home seems to show that our right to privacy is at its peak behind closed doors.

Unfortunately, the list of exceptions to the warrant requirement is large and continuously growing. These exceptions …

Foreword To The Neuroscience, Law & Government Symposium, Jane Campbell Moriarty

Akron Law Review

It is with much pleasure that I write the foreword for this Symposium in the Akron Law Review. The authors were each presenters at the Neuroscience, Law & Government Conference, held at The University of Akron School of Law in September, 2008. The articles in this edition of Akron Law Review are as diverse as the presentations themselves, and provide a fascinating glimpse into various ways in which neuroscience is making inroads in both law and government. The explosion of neuroscience and neuroimaging discoveries this decade is nothing short of remarkable, leading one prominent scientist to term the last several …