Law Commons^™

Florida V. Bostick: Abandonment Of Reason In Fourth Amendment Reasonable Person Analysis, James F. Heuerman

Northern Illinois University Law Review

This note examines the United States Supreme Court's decision which addressed the constitutionality of "bus sweeps" -- random suspicionless police questioning of interstate bus travelers. The Court concluded that a reasonable bus passenger could feel free to disregard police questioning, and accordingly found that not all such encounters are entitled to Fourth Amendment scrutiny. The author explores the Court's decision and contends that only by severely underestimating the inherent coercion in such encounters was the Court able to avoid the intuitive conclusion that passengers are "seized" during such questioning.

California V. Hodari D.: The Demise Of The Reasonable Person Test In Fourth Amendment Analysis, Patrick T. Costello

Northern Illinois University Law Review

This note examines the United Supreme Court decision which reexamined the point at which a police-citizen encounter becomes a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The Court concluded that a police-citizen encounter becomes a seizure only when the citizen yields to the show of police authority. The author contends that the Court's definition of a seizure alters, if not disposes of, the former definition, which defined seizure as the point at which a reasonable person, faced with a show of authority, no longer feels free to leave.

Seizing Fourth Amendment Rights, Kent R. Hopper

Missouri Law Review

Protections for criminal defendants and suspects have undergone a steady erosion with the increasing conservatism of the United States Supreme Court. A recent decision illustrates how this trend carries over to undermine the rights of all citizens. This Note focuses on the decision in Florida v. Bostick, and its impact on Fourth Amendment rights. Part III of this Note contains a review of the current status of Fourth Amendment interpretation from the standpoint of both search and seizure. In Part IV, the majority opinion and the dissent are analyzed in turn. Finally, in Part V, the argument is put forward …

Expansion Of The Automobile Exception To The Warrant Requirement: Police Discretion Replaces The Neutral And Detached Magistrate, Steven D. Soden

Missouri Law Review

As illegal drug usage continues to be an increasing concern of this country, the United States Supreme Court has lessened Fourth Amendment constraints on law enforcement officials. Because of the nature of drugs (minute amounts are illegal and thus they are easily transported and hidden), the allowable scope of searches is a critical issue in the "war on drugs." Regardless of whether the Court had drugs in mind when it set forth this new rule, it is drug related offenses where this decision will have the visible impact.

When “Special Needs” Meet Probable Cause: Denying The Devil Benefit Of Law, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

Removing laws to pursue the lawbreaker may be well intentioned, but the result is that society is susceptible to the evils those laws protect against. The traditional Fourth Amendment safeguards--probable cause and warrants--have been abandoned due to the development of a reasonableness standard because of the presence of “special needs” that were used to justify searches. The adoption of this alternative approach to Fourth Amendment interpretation was signalled by the truly landmark case of Terry v. Ohio.

By adopting the “reasonableness” analysis, the Supreme Court altered the impact of the exclusionary rule without directly modifying the rule. After Griffin v. …

Up In Smoke: Fourth Amendment Rights And The Burger Court, Gerald S. Reamey

Faculty Articles

When Warren Burger was appointed Chief Justice in 1969, he was expected to lead the Supreme Court away from its liberal, value-laden approach to constitutional adjudication. Indeed, a retrospective of the court’s work during the seventeen years Warren Burger served as Chief Justice reveals the expected conservative trend of the Chief Justice himself, as well as the Supreme Court generally. It does not, however, reflect wholesale rejection of the most controversial civil liberties decisions rendered by the Warren Court. It is also unclear that Chief Justice Burger was responsible for the Court’s retrenchment on civil liberties where it did occur. …

Searches And Seizure

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Searches And Seizure

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Searches And Seizure

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Searches And Seizure

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Searches And Seizure

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Heitman V. State: The Question Left Unanswered., Matthew W. Paul, Jeffrey L. Van Horn

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Heitman v. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals appeared to break with the court’s prior holdings to announce it would no longer “automatically adopt and apply” to the search and seizure provisions of the Texas Constitution “the Supreme Court’s interpretations of the Fourth Amendment.” The reaction to Heitman was immediate and striking. Heitman is obviously a significant decision that could impact Texas criminal jurisprudence for decades. Yet, the decision left many questions unanswered, including whether the search and seizure provision should be construed as placing greater restrictions on law enforcement than the Fourth Amendment of the United States …