Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (196)
- University of Michigan Law School (116)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (85)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (46)
- UIC School of Law (36)
-
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (27)
- University of Nebraska - Lincoln (24)
- William & Mary Law School (24)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (21)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (17)
- University of Richmond (15)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (12)
- Cornell University Law School (11)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (11)
- University of Colorado Law School (11)
- Emory University School of Law (10)
- Fordham Law School (10)
- St. John's University School of Law (10)
- University of Georgia School of Law (10)
- University of Maine School of Law (10)
- Mercer University School of Law (9)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (9)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (8)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (8)
- American University Washington College of Law (7)
- Georgia State University College of Law (7)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (7)
- Southern Methodist University (7)
- St. Thomas University College of Law (7)
- Brooklyn Law School (6)
- Keyword
-
- Fourth Amendment (199)
- Police (106)
- Fourth amendment (92)
- Privacy (74)
- United States Supreme Court (68)
-
- Exclusionary rule (67)
- Searches (67)
- Probable cause (65)
- Search and seizure (65)
- Search (59)
- Criminal procedure (56)
- Supreme Court (50)
- Warrant (43)
- Seizures (40)
- Search and Seizure (39)
- Criminal Procedure (37)
- Evidence (35)
- Seizure (33)
- Reasonable suspicion (29)
- Fifth Amendment (28)
- Constitution (27)
- Constitutional Law (26)
- Miranda v. Arizona (26)
- Surveillance (26)
- Law (25)
- New York (25)
- Federal (24)
- Mapp v. Ohio (24)
- Technology (24)
- Law enforcement (22)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (195)
- Touro Law Review (82)
- Michigan Law Review (59)
- Faculty Scholarship (43)
- Articles (37)
-
- Faculty Articles (34)
- UIC Law Review (33)
- Nebraska Journal on Advancing Justice (22)
- Faculty Publications (14)
- Cardozo Law Review (13)
- Oklahoma Law Review (13)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (13)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (12)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (11)
- Publications (11)
- Scholarly Articles (11)
- Maine Law Review (10)
- Mercer Law Review (9)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (8)
- Scholarly Works (8)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (8)
- Book Chapters (7)
- Georgia State University Law Review (7)
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (7)
- University of Richmond Law Review (7)
- NYLS Law Review (6)
- Other Faculty Publications (6)
- St. Thomas Law Review (6)
- William & Mary Law Review (6)
- Akron Law Review (5)
- Publication Type
Articles 391 - 420 of 919
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
What Caused The 2016 Chicago Homicide Spike? An Empirical Examination Of The 'Aclu Effect' And The Role Of Stop And Frisks In Preventing Gun Violence, Paul Cassell, Richard Fowles
What Caused The 2016 Chicago Homicide Spike? An Empirical Examination Of The 'Aclu Effect' And The Role Of Stop And Frisks In Preventing Gun Violence, Paul Cassell, Richard Fowles
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
Homicides increased dramatically in Chicago in 2016. In 2015, 480 Chicago residents were killed. The next year, 754 were killed–274 more homicide victims, tragically producing an extraordinary 58% increase in a single year. This article attempts to unravel what happened.
This article provides empirical evidence that the reduction in stop and frisks by the Chicago Police Department beginning around December 2015 was responsible for the homicide spike that started immediately thereafter. The sharp decline in the number of stop and frisks is a strong candidate for the causal factor, particularly since the timing of the homicide spike so perfectly coincides …
Standing Under State Search And Seizure Provision: Why The Minnesota Supreme Court Should Have Rejected The Federal Standards And Instead Invoked Greater Protection Under Its Own Constitution In State V. Carter, Rebecca C. Garrett
Maine Law Review
In State v. Carter, the Minnesota Supreme Court considered whether a criminal defendant had “standing” to challenge an alleged search under the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution. The defendant moved to suppress evidence obtained by a police officer who had peered in the window of an apartment where the defendant was participating in a drug-packaging operation with the apartment's leaseholder. A divided court held that the defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the apartment. Therefore, the defendant had standing to challenge the legality of the police officer's observations pursuant to the Fourth …
Privacy Vs. Protection: Why Tracking Mobile-Device Location Data Without A Warrant Requires A Fourth Amendment Exception, Andrew Stover
Privacy Vs. Protection: Why Tracking Mobile-Device Location Data Without A Warrant Requires A Fourth Amendment Exception, Andrew Stover
Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology
No abstract provided.
Legal Consciousness As Race Consciousness: Expansion Of The Fourth Amendment Seizure Analysis Through Objective Knowledge Of Police Impunity, Lindsey Webb
Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship
Encounters between police officers and members of the community are deeply influenced by race. Yet when courts assess whether police officers have complied with the Fourth Amendment, they explicitly exclude consideration of the ways in which the police-civilian interaction was influenced by racial bias, assumptions, and fear. In determining whether law enforcement officers seized a civilian, for example, courts look to the objective circumstances of the event, such as the number of officers involved, whether police weapons were drawn, and the tone of voice the officers used. They then assess whether, under such circumstances, a reasonable person would feel free …
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang L. Ngov
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang L. Ngov
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Carpenter V. United States And The Fourth Amendment: The Best Way Forward, Stephen E. Henderson
Carpenter V. United States And The Fourth Amendment: The Best Way Forward, Stephen E. Henderson
Faculty Articles
We finally have a federal ‘test case.’ In Carpenter v. United States, the Supreme Court is poised to set the direction of the Fourth Amendment in the digital age. The case squarely presents how the twentieth-century third party doctrine will fare in contemporary times, and the stakes could not be higher. This Article reviews the Carpenter case and how it fits within the greater discussion of the Fourth Amendment third party doctrine and location surveillance, and I express a hope that the Court will be both a bit ambitious and a good measure cautious. As for ambition, the Court …
Rhode Island's Prescription Drug Database: Warrantless Searches By Law Enforcement Pass Constitutional Muster, Stephen D. Lapatin
Rhode Island's Prescription Drug Database: Warrantless Searches By Law Enforcement Pass Constitutional Muster, Stephen D. Lapatin
Roger Williams University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Irrelevance: The Court’S Abdication In Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence, Tonja Jacobi, Ross Berlin
Supreme Irrelevance: The Court’S Abdication In Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence, Tonja Jacobi, Ross Berlin
Faculty Articles
Criminal procedure is one of the Supreme Court’s most active areas of jurisprudence, but the Court’s rulings are largely irrelevant to the actual workings of the criminal justice system. The Court’s irrelevance takes two forms: objectively, on the numbers, its jurisprudence fails to protect the vast majority of people affected by the criminal justice system; and in terms of salience, the Court has sidestepped the major challenges in the United States today relating to the criminal justice system. These challenges include discrimination in stops and frisks, fatal police shootings, unconscionable plea deals, mass incarceration, and disproportionate execution of racial minorities. …
Game Of Drones: Rolling The Dice With Unmanned Aerial Vehicles And Privacy, Rebecca L. Scharf
Game Of Drones: Rolling The Dice With Unmanned Aerial Vehicles And Privacy, Rebecca L. Scharf
Scholarly Works
This Article offers a practical three-part test for courts and law enforcement to utilize when faced with drone and privacy issues. Specifically addressing the question: how should courts analyze the Fourth Amendment’s protection against ‘unreasonable searches’ in the context of drones?
The Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence produced an intricate framework to address issues arising out of the intersection of technology and privacy interests. In prominent decisions, including United States v. Katz, California v. Ciraolo, Kyllo v. United States, and most notably, United States v. Jones, the Court focused on whether the use of a single …
State V. Hill, Nazariy Gavrysh
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang Ngov
Police Ignorance And Mistake Of Law Under The Fourth Amendment, Eang Ngov
Faculty Articles
No abstract provided.
Fourth Amendment Anxiety, Kiel Brennan-Marquez, Stephen E. Henderson
Fourth Amendment Anxiety, Kiel Brennan-Marquez, Stephen E. Henderson
Faculty Articles
In Birchfield v. North Dakota (2016), the Supreme Court broke new Fourth Amendment ground by establishing that law enforcement’s collection of information can be cause for “anxiety,” meriting constitutional protection, even if subsequent uses of the information are tightly restricted. This change is significant. While the Court has long recognized the reality that police cannot always be trusted to follow constitutional rules, Birchfield changes how that concern is implemented in Fourth Amendment law, and importantly, in a manner that acknowledges the new realities of data-driven policing. Beyond offering a careful reading of Birchfield, this Article has two goals. First, …
United States V. Ammons, Rebecca Ruffer
Exigent Circumstances And Searches Incident To Arrest In New York: The Difficulties And Distinctions, Kyle Knox
Exigent Circumstances And Searches Incident To Arrest In New York: The Difficulties And Distinctions, Kyle Knox
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Illegal Predicate Searches And Tainted Warrants After Heien And Strieff, Kit Kinports
Illegal Predicate Searches And Tainted Warrants After Heien And Strieff, Kit Kinports
Faculty Scholarship
A long-standing debate has surrounded the relationship between two features of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule - the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine and the good-faith exception - in cases where the evidence used to secure a search warrant was obtained in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights. Some judges and scholars maintain that the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine takes precedence in such "tainted warrant" cases, leading to the suppression of any evidence seized in executing the warrant unless the warrant was supported by probable cause independent of the illegal predicate search. By contrast, others believe that …
Get Off My Porch: United States V. Carloss And The Escalating Dangers Of “Knock And Talks”, Skyler K. Sikes
Get Off My Porch: United States V. Carloss And The Escalating Dangers Of “Knock And Talks”, Skyler K. Sikes
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
United States V. Carloss: Should The Police Act Like Good Neighbors?, Cole Mclanahan
United States V. Carloss: Should The Police Act Like Good Neighbors?, Cole Mclanahan
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Fourth Amendment Disclosure Doctrines, Monu Bedi
The Fourth Amendment Disclosure Doctrines, Monu Bedi
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
The third party and public disclosure doctrines (together the “disclosure doctrines”) are long-standing hurdles to Fourth Amendment protection. These doctrines have become increasingly relevant to assessing the government’s use of recent technologies such as data mining, drone surveillance, and cell site location data. It is surprising then that both the Supreme Court and scholars, at times, have associated them together as expressing one principle. It turns out that each relies on unique foundational triggers and does not stand or fall with the other. This Article tackles this issue and provides a comprehensive topology for analyzing the respective contours of each …
The Supreme Court's Long And Perhaps Unnecessary Struggle To Find A Standard Of Culpability To Regulate The Federal Exclusionary Remedy For Fourth/Fourteenth Amendment Violations, Melvyn H. Zarr
Maine Law Review
On January 14, 2009, the United States Supreme Court decided Herring v. United States. In Herring, the defendant moved to suppress evidence that he alleged was seized as a result of an arrest that violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court approved the decision below to deny suppression of the evidence. The decision set off a flurry of speculation that the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule would not see its 100th birthday in 2014. A headline in the New York Times of January 31 declared: “Supreme Court Edging Closer to Repeal of Evidence Ruling.” Another …
Litigating Police Misconduct: Does The Litigation Process Matter? Does It Work?
Litigating Police Misconduct: Does The Litigation Process Matter? Does It Work?
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
No abstract provided.
The Legacy Of Slavery And The Continued Marginalization Of Communities Of Color Within The Legal System, Julia N. Alvarez
The Legacy Of Slavery And The Continued Marginalization Of Communities Of Color Within The Legal System, Julia N. Alvarez
Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects
The aim of this thesis paper is to demonstrate how the history of slavery in the United States continues to marginalize communities of color. The history of slavery in America was the result of various factors. Some of these factors included but were not limited to; economic, legal, and social. Slavery provided a reliable and self-reproducing workforce. The laws enacted during slavery ensured the continuation of the social order of the time. This social order was based on the generalized understanding that blacks were born into servitude. Those born into slavery were not given the same legal or economic status …
Find My Criminals: Fourth Amendment Implications Of The Universal Cell Phone "App" That Every Cell Phone User Has But No Criminal Wants, Christopher Joseph
Find My Criminals: Fourth Amendment Implications Of The Universal Cell Phone "App" That Every Cell Phone User Has But No Criminal Wants, Christopher Joseph
Barry Law Review
No abstract provided.
I Am Not Law Enforcement! Why The Special Needs Exception To The Fourth Amendment Should Apply To Caseworkers Investigating Allegations Of Child Abuse, Lauren Kobrick
Cardozo Law Review
The note examines the application of the Fourth Amendment's special needs doctrine in child abuse investigations, advocating for the adoption of a primary purpose test to determine the doctrine's applicability. It critiques the inconsistent approaches across circuits and proposes this test to clarify when warrantless searches and seizures by caseworkers are constitutional, ensuring a balance between child protection and Fourth Amendment protections.
The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo
The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo
Fordham Law Review
This Note explores the CSLI debate by analyzing the circuit courts’ decisions, scholars’ disagreement with those decisions, and the alternative approaches offered to protect and evaluate CSLI records. This Note concludes that warrantless CSLI monitoring should be analyzed under the “mosaic theory” of the Fourth Amendment. In support, it argues that this theory best addresses the concerns with CSLI tracking and proposes a standard that courts may use to apply it.
The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo
The Fourth Amendment, Csli Tracking, And The Mosaic Theory, Christian Bennardo
Fordham Law Review
This Note explores the CSLI debate by analyzing the circuit courts’ decisions, scholars’ disagreement with those decisions, and the alternative approaches offered to protect and evaluate CSLI records. This Note concludes that warrantless CSLI monitoring should be analyzed under the “mosaic theory” of the Fourth Amendment. In support, it argues that this theory best addresses the concerns with CSLI tracking and proposes a standard that courts may use to apply it.
Civil Liberty Or National Security: The Battle Over Iphone Encryption, Karen Lowell
Civil Liberty Or National Security: The Battle Over Iphone Encryption, Karen Lowell
Georgia State University Law Review
On June 5, 2013, Edward Snowden released what would be the first of many documents exposing the vast breadth of electronic surveillance the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National Security Agency (NSA) had been conducting on millions of United States citizens. Although the federal agencies had legal authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to collect metadata from companies such as Verizon, many Americans considered this data collection to be a massive invasion of privacy.
Equipped with the knowledge of sweeping domestic surveillance programs, citizens and technology firms fighting for strong privacy and security protection, have started …
Knock And Talk No More, Jamesa J. Drake
Knock And Talk No More, Jamesa J. Drake
Maine Law Review
The Supreme Court has set out a roadmap for challenging one of the most common and insidious police tactics used today: the knock-and-talk. The path is short and clear and it leads to the inescapable conclusion that the knock-and-talk—as it is actually employed in practice—is unconstitutional. Although the Court has yet to squarely consider the issue, some Justices have already taken pains to say, in dictum, that knock-and-talks are lawful. Practitioners should not be dissuaded. What this faction of the Court describes is a highly romanticized—and utterly inaccurate—conception of what a knock-and-talk actually entails. The sort of activity that these …
Riley And Abandonment: Expanding Fourth Amendment Protection Of Cell Phones, Abigail Hoverman
Riley And Abandonment: Expanding Fourth Amendment Protection Of Cell Phones, Abigail Hoverman
Northwestern University Law Review
In light of the privacy concerns inherent to personal technological devices, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in 2014 recognizing the need for categorical heightened protection of cell phones during searches incident to arrest in Riley v. California. This Note argues for expansion of heightened protections for cell phones in the context of abandoned evidence because the same privacy concerns apply. This argument matters because state and federal courts have not provided the needed protection to abandoned cell phones pre- or post-Riley.
Commodifying Policing: A Recipe For Community-Police Tensions, Nora V. Demleitner
Commodifying Policing: A Recipe For Community-Police Tensions, Nora V. Demleitner
Scholarly Articles
This Article, in Part II, begins with a description of how municipalities, at least since the recession of 2008, have fallen short of fully funding their departments. Part III focuses on four distinct outside funding components and their impact on policing. The first subsection discusses asset forfeitures, under both state and federal law. Subsection two highlights revenue derived from citations, often in the form of traffic tickets. A discussion of fees that are being added to fines, often to fund courts, probation agencies, and police departments, follows. The increasing amounts and types of fees imposed have substantially increased the burden …
The Fourth Amendment Categorical Imperative, David Gray
The Fourth Amendment Categorical Imperative, David Gray
Michigan Law Review Online
The vast majority of current Fourth Amendment doctrine is unfounded, incoherent, and dangerous. The culprit is the Supreme Court’s 1967 decision in Katz v. United States, which defines “search” as government conduct that violates subjectively manifested expectations of privacy “that society is prepared to recognize as ‘reasonable.’ ” This is pure applesauce. Nowhere will you find a standard dictionary that defines “search” in these terms. Neither will you hear a native speaker of the English language use “search” in this sense unless her mind has been polluted by a semester of studying criminal procedure. The Court created this definition …