Law Commons^™

Fourth Amendment Fiduciaries, Kiel Brennan-Marquez

Fordham Law Review

Fourth Amendment law is sorely in need of reform. To paraphrase Justice Sotomayor’s concurrence in United States v. Jones, the idea that people have no expectation of privacy in information voluntarily shared with third-parties—the foundation of the widely reviled “third-party doctrine”—makes little sense in the digital age.

In truth, however, it is not just the third-party doctrine that needs retooling today. It is the Fourth Amendment’s general approach to the problem of “shared information.” Under existing law, if A shares information with B, A runs the risk of “misplaced trust”—the risk that B will disclose the information to law …

Dangerous Dicta, David Gray

David C. Gray

In United States v. Heller, the Court held that individuals have a Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms apart from their associations with state militias. Although that holding was and remains controversial, less attention has been paid to what the Heller Court had to say about the Fourth Amendment. Writing for the Court in Heller, Justice Scalia asserts that the phrase “right of the people” in the Fourth Amendment “unambiguously refers to individual rights, not ‘collective’ rights or rights that may only be exercised through participation in some corporate body.” By any definition, this is dicta. It is …

Administrative Inspections: The Loophole In The Fourth Amendment, Ryan Nasim

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fourth Amendment Right To Privacy: When Is It Reasonable To Search A Minor?, Ashley Moruzzi

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fourth Amendment Inquiries: When Officers Are Not Justified To Approach A Vehicle, Jeremy M. Miller

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A “Workplace Exception”: Exploring The Legal Loophole That Allows For Warrantless Gps Tracking Of Government Employees’ Personal Vehicles, Antonia J. Broughton

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Congressional Due Process, Andrew M. Wright

Andrew M Wright

This article identifies significant deficiencies in Congress’s investigative practices. Consequences of congressional scrutiny can be profound, yet the second Congress calls, almost none of the safeguards of the American legal system are present. I argue such practices demonstrate institutional indifference to constitutional due process norms. The article highlights differences between congressional and judicial proceedings with respect to the safeguards of witnesses and targets. The purpose of congressional inquiry fundamentally differs from adjudication, and therefore does not call for the full complement of procedural rights afforded in judicial proceedings. Congress seeks facts and expertise to inform legislative judgments that will have …

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 …

Scott V. Harris And The Future Of Summary Judgment, Tobias Barrington Wolff

All Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s decision in Scott v. Harris has quickly become a staple in many Civil Procedure courses, and small wonder. The cinematic high-speed car chase complete with dash-cam video and the Court’s controversial treatment of that video evidence seem tailor-made for classroom discussion. As is often true with instant classics, however, splashy first impressions can mask a more complex state of affairs. At the heart of Scott v. Harris lies the potential for a radical doctrinal reformation: a shift in the core summary judgment standard undertaken to justify a massive expansion of interlocutory appellate jurisdiction in qualified immunity cases. …

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 …

The Search And Seizure Of Private Papers: Fourth And Fifth Amendment Considerations, Steven Shiffrin

Steven H. Shiffrin

There is a recognizable factual distinction between the search and seizure of private papers and the search and seizure of non-documentary items. It is difficult, however, to decide when such a distinction should assume constitutional dimensions. Specifically, are there circumstances under which private papers should be immune from search and seizure? In a 1967 landmark case, Warden v. Hayden, the United States Supreme Court raised doubts concerning the continued validity of decades of settled law on this important issue. Warden's reopening of this problem aroused the curiosity of commentators, spurred new policy arguments in the American Law Institute, divided the …

Supreme Court, Bronx County, People V. Nieto, Jean D'Alessandro

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Section 1983 Decisions: (October 2001 Term), Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Applying The 'Cuffs: Consistency And Clarity In A Bright-Line Rule For Arrest-Like Restraints Under Miranda Custody, Luis Then

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Calling Out Maryland V. King: Dna, Cell Phones, And The Fourth Amendment, Jennie Vee Silk

Jennie Vee Silk

In Maryland v. King, the Supreme Court narrowly upheld a Maryland statute that permits police to obtain a DNA sample from an arrestee without a search warrant. A year later, the Court drastically changed course and provided significantly more protection to an arrestee’s privacy. In a unanimous decision, the Court in Riley v. California held that police must obtain a search warrant before they can search the cell phone of an arrestee.

This article is the first to compare the Court’s conflicting decisions in Riley and King. Riley and King present the same issue: governmental invasion of privacy for …

From Fugitives To Ferguson: Repairing Historical And Structural Defects In Legally Sanctioned Use Of Deadly Force, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

The lawful use of lethal force to subdue suspected wrongdoers has a long tradition in our nation. There is certainly nothing wrong with securing, incapacitating, or even killing violent persons who pose a serious threat to the lives of innocent individuals. One of the important roles of government is to protect people from harm and keep the peace. Recent events in Ferguson, Missouri, have highlighted the tension between the officers on the beat and citizens on the street. These tensions are not likely to subside unless there are major structural changes in the way the police do their job and …

The Fourth Amendment And Surveillance In A Digital World, Arthur Leavens

Faculty Scholarship

Technology has transformed government surveillance and opened traditionally private information to official scrutiny. The current privacy-based approach to the Fourth Amendment is unable to cope with the changes. This Article offers a solution to the problems that technological surveillance techniques present. Starting with the introduction of the approach in Katz, the Article reviews the development of privacy-based approach. It then looks at three 21st century Supreme Court cases that grappled with applying the Katz test to advanced technological surveillance techniques: Kyllo, Quon, and Jones. These cases demonstrate the problems that the privacy-based approach creates and the …

Using The Dna Testing Of Arrestees To Reevaluate Fourth Amendment Doctrine, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

With the advent of DNA testing, numerous issues have arisen with regard to obtaining and using evidence developed from such testing. As courts have come to regard DNA testing as a reliable method for linking some people to crimes and for exonerating others, these issues are especially significant. The federal government and most states have enacted statutes that permit or direct the testing of those convicted of at least certain crimes. Courts have almost universally approved such testing, rejecting arguments that obtaining and using such evidence violates the Fourth Amendment.

More recently governments have enacted laws permitting or directing the …

Cutting Cops Too Much Slack, Wayne A. Logan

Scholarly Publications

Police officers can make mistakes, which, for better or worse, the U.S. Supreme Court has often seen fit to forgive. Police, for instance, can make mistakes of fact when assessing whether circumstances justify the seizure of an individual or search of a residence; they can even be mistaken about the identity of those they arrest. This essay examines yet another, arguably more significant context where police mistakes are forgiven: when they seize a person based on their misunderstanding of what a law prohibits.

Government Retention And Use Of Unlawfully Secured Dna Evidence, Wayne A. Logan

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Dystopian Constitutionalism, Thomas P. Crocker

Faculty Publications

This article describes and defends the distinctive role and rich tradition of using contrastive dystopian states in constitutional theory and practice. As constitutional tradition going back to the founding, U.S. constitutional analysis was replete with arguments about what practices would lead to an undesirable state of tyranny. In more recent constitutional history, the use of contrasting examples of the “police state,” totalitarianism, or Orwellian references have been prevalent in Supreme Court opinions across doctrinal domains, most recently making a prominent appearance at oral argument in the Fourth Amendment case, United States v. Jones. In contrast to more comprehensive constitutional theories, …

Regulating Law Enforcement's Use Of Drones: The Need For State Legislation, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

The recent rise of domestic drone technology has prompted privacy advocates and members of the public to call for the regulation of the use of drones by law enforcement officers. Numerous states have proposed legislation to regulate government drone use, and thirteen have passed laws that restrict the use of drones by law enforcement agencies. Despite the activity in state legislatures, commentary on drones tends to focus on how courts, rather than legislative bodies, can restrict the government's use of drones. Commentators call for wider Fourth Amendment protections that would limit government surveillance. In the process, in-depth analysis of state …

United States V. Batista, Constantine Loizides

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.