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 631 - 660 of 919
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
To Serve And Protect: Thornton V. United States And The Newly Anemic Fourth Amendment, Jason Lewis
To Serve And Protect: Thornton V. United States And The Newly Anemic Fourth Amendment, Jason Lewis
Mercer Law Review
In Thornton v. United States, the United States Supreme Court further weakened the protection afforded by the Fourth Amendment by holding that an officer may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to arrest even when the suspect is first approached after exiting the vehicle. Under the guise of providing protection to police officers, this decision greatly expands the power of an arresting officer to search the private property of the arrestee and creates uncertainty on what constitutional limits apply to searches incident to arrest outside the home.
Equality, Objectivity, And Neutrality, Alafair S. Burke
Equality, Objectivity, And Neutrality, Alafair S. Burke
Michigan Law Review
When is homicide reasonable? That familiar, yet unanswered question continues to intrigue both courts and criminal law scholars, in large part because any response must first address the question, "reasonable to whom?" The standard story about why that threshold question is both difficult and interesting usually involves a juxtaposition of "objective" and "subjective" standards for judging claims of reasonableness. On the one hand, the story goes, is a "subjective" standard of reasonableness under which jurors evaluate the reasonableness of a criminal defendant's beliefs and actions by comparing them to those of a hypothetical reasonable person sharing all of the individual …
Identity Crisis: United States V. Hiibel And The Continued Erosion Of Privacy Rights, Beth Rosenblum
Identity Crisis: United States V. Hiibel And The Continued Erosion Of Privacy Rights, Beth Rosenblum
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Since When Is Dicta Enough To Trump Fourth Amendment Rights? The Aftermath Of Florida V. J.L., Melanie D. Wilson
Since When Is Dicta Enough To Trump Fourth Amendment Rights? The Aftermath Of Florida V. J.L., Melanie D. Wilson
Scholarly Articles
Unfortunately for individual liberty, and the inestimable right to personal security, the Supreme Court's extraneous language in its otherwise, well-reasoned decision in Florida v. J.L., and the lower federal courts' interpretation of that extraneous language, have jeopardized the Constitutional right to be free from capricious stops and frivolous frisks, both of which necessarily intrude on the sanctity of the person and sometimes "inflict great indignity and arouse strong resentment . . . ." When read logically and narrowly, the J.L. decision holds that an anonymous telephone tip, alone, does not give law enforcement a sufficient legal basis to stop or …
Faith-Based Miranda: Why The New Missouri V. Seibert Police Bad Faith Test Is A Terrible Idea, Joelle A. Moreno
Faith-Based Miranda: Why The New Missouri V. Seibert Police Bad Faith Test Is A Terrible Idea, Joelle A. Moreno
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Data Matching, Data Mining, And Due Process, Daniel J. Steinbock
Data Matching, Data Mining, And Due Process, Daniel J. Steinbock
Georgia Law Review
The Article concerns the governmental use of computerized data matching (comparison of records) and data mining (profiling),which increasingly are aimed at locating potential terrorists. The most striking aspect of virtually all anti-terrorist data matching and data mining decisions is the total absence of even the most rudimentary procedures for notice, hearing, or other opportunities for meaningful participation before, or even after, the deprivation is imposed. The Article evaluates under Fourth Amendment and due process standards a variety of law enforcement activities data matching or data mining might instigate. After reviewing these activities' potential effects on private, governmental, and accuracy interests, …
American Courts Are Drowning In The "Gene Pool": Excavating The Slippery Slope Mechanisms Behind Judicial Endorsement Of Dna Databases, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 115 (2005), Meghan Riley
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Richmond Public Interest Law Review
The Fourth Amendment permits police to use deadly force when there is an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death to themselves or others. Although the governing standard is well established in a general way, its application to particular facts and circumstances may not be clear to officers on the street. Unless a reasonable police officer would have understood that his/her decision to shoot was clearly constitutionally prohibited, the officer may be entitled to qualified immunity, a decision that the court can make on summary judgment before trial. Discussed first are shootings that are not subject to Fourth Amendment …
Nothing New Under The Sun? A Technologically Rational Doctrine Of Fourth Amendment Search, Stephen E. Henderson
Nothing New Under The Sun? A Technologically Rational Doctrine Of Fourth Amendment Search, Stephen E. Henderson
Faculty Articles
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Yet as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court, the Amendment places no restriction on police combing through financial records; telephone, e-mail and website transactional records; or garbage left for collection. Indeed there is no protection for any information knowingly provided to a third party, because the provider is said to retain no reasonable expectation of privacy in that information. As technology dictates that more and more of our personal lives are available to anyone equipped to receive them, and as social norms dictate that more and …
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Police Shootings Under The Fourth Amendment, Wayne C. Beyer
Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
The Fourth Amendment permits police to use deadly force when there is an imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death to themselves or others. Although the governing standard is well established in a general way, its application to particular facts and circumstances may not be clear to officers on the street. Unless a reasonable police officer would have understood that his/her decision to shoot was clearly constitutionally prohibited, the officer may be entitled to qualified immunity, a decision that the court can make on summary judgment before trial. Discussed first are shootings that are not subject to Fourth Amendment …
How Earl Warren's Twenty-Two Years In Law Enforcement Affected His Work As Chief Justice, Yale Kamisar
How Earl Warren's Twenty-Two Years In Law Enforcement Affected His Work As Chief Justice, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Before becoming governor of California, Earl Warren had spent his entire legal career, twenty-two years, in law enforcement. Professor Kamisar maintains that this experience significantly influenced Warren's work as a Supreme Court justice and gave him a unique perspective into police interrogation and other police practices. This article discusses some of Warren's experiences in law enforcement and searches for evidence of that experience in Warren's opinions. For example, when Warren was head of the Alameda County District Attorney's Office, he and his deputies not only relied on confessions in many homicide cases but also themselves interrogated homicide suspects. The seeds …
Justice In The Time Of Terror, Sharon L. Davies
Justice In The Time Of Terror, Sharon L. Davies
Michigan Law Review
On my drive into work recently I found myself behind a Ford pickup truck and noticed its bumper sticker: "When the going gets tough, I get a machine gun." Not a doctor. Not a counselor or mediator. Not a shelter for cover. Not the wisdom of a favored advisor or a proven friend. But a machine gun. How odd, I thought, to prefer a weapon incapable of identifying with any precision, any careful thought, where the enemy of the wielder of it might actually be hidden. A weapon as apt to injure non-targets as targets. A weapon mindless of its …
Profiling With Apologies, Sherry F. Colb
Profiling With Apologies, Sherry F. Colb
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Technology, Privacy, And The Courts: A Reply To Colb And Swire, Orin S. Kerr
Technology, Privacy, And The Courts: A Reply To Colb And Swire, Orin S. Kerr
Michigan Law Review
I thank Sherry Colb and Peter Swire for devoting their time and considerable talents to responding to my article, The Fourth Amendment and New Technologies: Constitutional Myths and the Case for Caution. I will conclude with a few comments.
The Fourth Amendment And New Technologies: Constitutional Myths And The Case For Caution, Orin S. Kerr
The Fourth Amendment And New Technologies: Constitutional Myths And The Case For Caution, Orin S. Kerr
Michigan Law Review
To one who values federalism, federal preemption of state law may significantly threaten the autonomy and core regulatory authority of The Supreme Court recently considered whether a1mmg an infrared thermal imaging device at a suspect's home can violate the Fourth Amendment. Kyllo v. United States announced a new and comprehensive rule: the government's warrantless use of senseenhancing technology that is "not in general use" violates the Fourth Amendment when it yields "details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion." Justice Scalia's majority opinion acknowledged that the Court's rule was not needed to resolve the case …
Katz Is Dead. Long Live Katz, Peter P. Swire
Katz Is Dead. Long Live Katz, Peter P. Swire
Michigan Law Review
Katz v. United States is the king of Supreme Court surveillance cases. Written in 1967, it struck down the earlier regime of property rules, declaring that "the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places." The concurrence by Justice Harlan announced the new regime - court-issued warrants are required where there is an infringement on a person's "reasonable expectation of privacy." Together with the companion case Berger v. New York, Katz has stood for a grand conception of the Fourth Amendment as a bulwark against wiretaps and other emerging forms of surveillance. Professor Orin Kerr, in his excellent article, shows that …
A World Without Privacy: Why Property Does Not Define The Limits Of The Right Against Unreasonable Searches And Seizures, Sherry F. Colb
A World Without Privacy: Why Property Does Not Define The Limits Of The Right Against Unreasonable Searches And Seizures, Sherry F. Colb
Michigan Law Review
Imagine for a moment that it is the year 2020. An American company has developed a mind-reading device, called the "brain wave recorder" ("BWR"). The BWR is a highly sensitive instrument that detects electrical impulses from any brain within ten feet of the machine. Though previously thought impossible, the BWR can discern the following information about the target individual: (1) whether he or she is happy, sad, anxious, depressed, or irritable; (2) whether he or she is even slightly sexually aroused; (3) whether he or she is taking any medication (and if so, what the medication is); (4) if a …
Overcoming Hiddenness: The Role Of Intentions In Fourth Amendment Analysis, Daniel B. Yeager
Overcoming Hiddenness: The Role Of Intentions In Fourth Amendment Analysis, Daniel B. Yeager
Faculty Scholarship
This Article rehearses a response to the problems posed to and by the Supreme Court's attempts to work out the meaning and operation of the word "search." After commencing Part II by meditating on the notion of privacy, I take up its relation to the antecedent suspicion or knowledge that Fourth-Amendment law requires as a justification for all privacy invasions. From there, I look specifically at that uneasy relation in Supreme Court jurisprudence, which has come to privilege privacy over property as a Fourth Amendment value. From there, Part III reviews the sources or bases that can tell us what …
Rethinking Miranda: Custodial Interrogation As A Fourth Amendment Search And Seizure, 37 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1109 (2004), Timothy P. O'Neill
Rethinking Miranda: Custodial Interrogation As A Fourth Amendment Search And Seizure, 37 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1109 (2004), Timothy P. O'Neill
UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Tip-Based Warrantless Searches And Seizures Under The Rubric Of The Investigativedetention Exception To The Warrant Requirement: What Law Enforcementpersonnel Must Understand About Exclusion And Training, Brian Decker
Richmond Public Interest Law Review
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Drug-Detection Dogs, Traffic Stops, And The Fourth Amendment, Michael J. Fields
Drug-Detection Dogs, Traffic Stops, And The Fourth Amendment, Michael J. Fields
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
United States V. Langford, Amy Garzon
Tip-Based Warrantless Searches And Seizures Under The Rubric Of The Investigativedetention Exception To The Warrant Requirement: What Law Enforcementpersonnel Must Understand About Exclusion And Training, Brian Decker
Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The "Routine Traffic Stop" From Start To Finish: Too Much "Routine," Not Enough Fourth Amendment, Wayne R. Lafave
The "Routine Traffic Stop" From Start To Finish: Too Much "Routine," Not Enough Fourth Amendment, Wayne R. Lafave
Michigan Law Review
Yale Kamisar, about which I have said too much elsewhere in this issue of the Review, could rightly be called "Mr. Confessions," for he has not only authored books and a host of articles on the subject of police interrogation, but for years has been printing Miranda cards in his basement and selling them to police departments all across the nation. Moreover, he may be the only law professor in the country who has both personally coerced a confession and had a confession coerced out of him. As Kamisar has himself noted, my own "intellectual sandbox" has been the …
Criminal Law, Marla Graff Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
Criminal Law, Marla Graff Decker, Stephen R. Mccullough
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
In The Wake Of Kyllo V. United States: The Future Of Thermal Imaging Cameras, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 507 (2003), Paul Kleppetsch
In The Wake Of Kyllo V. United States: The Future Of Thermal Imaging Cameras, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 507 (2003), Paul Kleppetsch
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Stubbornness Of Pretexts, Daniel B. Yeager
Stubbornness Of Pretexts, Daniel B. Yeager
Faculty Scholarship
This Article will reflect on (1) how the Whren v. United States failure to acknowledge what counts as a pretext accounts for the residual confusion as to whether or not Whren really has killed off the pretext argument in constitutional criminal procedure, and (2) the extent to which the Court in Sullivan compounded that failure, which I hope to lightly correct here by distinguishing motives from intentions and then by elaborating the role that each plays, or at least should play, in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.
Criminal Procedure: Searching High And Low For A Search In Kyllo: Justice Scalia Reaffirms Core Protections Of The Fourth Amendment, Scott Byrd
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Cultural Context Matters: Terry's "Seesaw Effect", Frank Rudy Cooper
Cultural Context Matters: Terry's "Seesaw Effect", Frank Rudy Cooper
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
In Defense Of The Search And Seizure Exclusionary Rule (Law And Truth - The Twenty-First Annual National Student Federalist Society Symposium On Law And Public Policy - 2002), Yale Kamisar
Articles
think Dean Pye's advice about casebook writing was sound,6 and what he had to say also applies to discussions and debates about such issues as the search and seizure exclusionary rule. We cannot (at least we should not) begin with Mapp v. Ohio. We need a prelude.