Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Supreme Court, Kings County, People V. Ortiz, Robert Kronenberg

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, Kings County, People V. Butler, Robert B. Kronenberg

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals, People V. Robinson, Jonathan Janofsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: A True Original(Ist) 02-15-2016, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Hidden Under Caste Of America: An Examination Of The Effects Of Terry V. Ohio, Florida V. Bostick, & Whren V. United States And Colorblindness On African Americans, Austin Schoeck

Political Science: Student Scholarship & Creative Works

No abstract provided.

Riley V. California And The Stickiness Principle, Steven I. Friedland

Duke Law & Technology Review

In Fourth Amendment decisions, different concepts, facts and assumptions about reality are often tethered together by vocabulary and fact, creating a ‘Stickiness Principle.’ In particular, form and function historically were considered indistinguishable, not as separate factors. For example, “containers” carried things, “watches” told time, and “phones” were used to make voice calls. Advancing technology, though, began to fracture this identity and the broader Stickiness Principle. In June 2014, Riley v. California and its companion case, United States v. Wurie, offered the Supreme Court an opportunity to begin untethering form and function and dismantling the Stickiness Principle. Riley presented the question …

Policing In The Era Of Permissiveness: Mitigating Misconduct Through Third-Party Standing, Julian A. Cook Iii

Brooklyn Law Review

On April 4, 2015, Walter L. Scott was driving his vehicle when he was stopped by Officer Michael T. Slager of the North Charleston, South Carolina, police department for a broken taillight. A dash cam video from the officer’s vehicle showed the two men engaged in what appeared to be a rather routine verbal exchange. Sometime after Slager returned to his vehicle, Scott exited his car and ran away from Slager, prompting the officer to pursue him on foot. After he caught up with Scott in a grassy field near a muffler establishment, a scuffle between the men ensued, purportedly …

Never Alone: Why The Inevitable Influx Of Drones Necessitates A New Fourth Amendment Standard That Adequately Protects Reasonable Expectations Of Privacy, Paul Burgin

University of Baltimore Law Review

In June 2011, North Dakota cattle rancher Rodney Brossart became the first American to be arrested with the aid of a drone (Unmanned Aircraft System(s) or UAS) operated by law enforcement. Six cows found their way onto Brossart's property, and he refused to turn them over to law enforcement officials. Brossart and a few family members chased police officers off of his property at gunpoint, and police later returned with a warrant and SWAT team. A sixteen-hour standoff ensued until police called in the assistance of a UAS to pinpoint Brossart's exact location. Shortly thereafter, SWAT officers rushed in, tased, …

To Catch A Terrorist: The Improper Use Of Profiling In U.S. Post-9/11 Counterterrorism, Kamillia Crawford

Honors Undergraduate Theses

The attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) caused thousands of deaths, national and global panic, and immediate action by the federal government to protect the borders of the United States of America (USA) from terrorism. In response to these attacks, the United States (U.S.) government enacted laws for law enforcement agencies to protect against terrorist activities. Law enforcement agencies are effective in combating terrorism, but their measures contain a major flaw - the improper use of race in profiling to address national security and public safety concerns. Racial profiling is an ineffective measure for preventing terrorism. There are solutions to …

Fourth Amendment Implications Of Police-Worn Body Cameras, Erik Nielsen

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

For The Protection Of Society's Most Vulnerable, The Ada Should Apply To Arrests, Thomas J. Auner

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse—Unless You’Re A Cop, Hannah Dunn

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

When The Police Get The Law Wrong: How Heien V. North Carolina Further Erodes The Fourth Amendment, Vivan M. Rivera

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law: Hey, That's My Trash! Warrantless Searches Of Garbage Under The Minnesota Constitution—State V. Mcmurray, Lauren M. Hoglund

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lawn Signs: A Fourth Amendment For Constitutional Curmudgeons, Andrew Ferguson, Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Articles

What is the constitutional significance of the proverbial “keep off the grass” sign? This question—asked by curmudgeonly neighbors everywhere—has been given new currency in a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court. Indeed, Florida v. Jardines might have bestowed constitutional curmudgeons with significant new Fourth Amendment protections. By expressing expectations regarding—and control over—access to property, “the people” may be able to claim greater Fourth Amendment protections not only for their homes, but also for their persons, papers, and effects. This article launches a constitutionally grounded, but lighthearted campaign of citizen education and empowerment: Fourth Amendment LAWn signs. With every …

A Rose By Any Other Name: Regulating Law Enforcement Bulk Metadata Collection, Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Articles

In Other People’s Papers, Jane Bambauer argues for careful reform of the Fourth Amendment’s third party doctrine, providing an important contribution to an increasingly rich field of scholarship, judicial opinion, statute, and law reform. Bambauer is especially concerned with access to bodies of third-party data that can be filtered and mined, as they can be privacy invasive but also effective and less subject to traditional investigative prejudices and limitations. Although her article provocatively overclaims in trying to set itself apart from existing proposals, by analyzing existing constitutional and statutory law—including what I have termed a “limited” third party doctrine—and comparing …

What's Fear Got To Do With It?: The "Armed And Dangerous" Requirement Of Terry, Gerald S. Reamey

Marquette Law Review

Rarely has a court’s opinion, even one from the Supreme Court of the United States, so altered existing notions of constitutional criminal procedure law as did the opinion in Terry v. Ohio. On several levels, the opinion dramatically shifted the way in which the Fourth Amendment was understood. Law students who had learned about the probable cause “requirement” and the warrant “requirement” were surprised to learn, especially in the case of the former, that these “requirements” were not required at all. To continue to conceptualize the Fourth Amendment’s single sentence guarantees as consisting of a “warrant clause” and a “reasonableness” …

The Big Picture View Of Anonymous Tips From Ordinary People, Amanda M. Dadiego

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Quiet Expansion Of Qualified Immunity, Kit Kinports

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay discusses the Supreme Court’s tendency in recent opinions to covertly expand the reach of the qualified immunity defense available to public officials in § 1983 civil rights suits. In particular, the Essay points out that the Court, often in per curiam rulings, has described qualified immunity in increasingly broad terms and has qualified and retreated from its precedents, without offering any explanation or even acknowledging that it is deviating from past practice.

In making this claim, I focus on three specific issues: the manner in which the Court characterizes the standard governing the qualified immunity defense; the question …

Heien'S Mistake Of Law, Kit Kinports

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court has been whittling away at the Fourth Amendment for decades. The Court's 2014 ruling in Heien v. North Carolina allowing the police to make a traffic stop based on a reasonable mistake of law generated little controversy among the Justices and escaped largely unnoticed by the press-perhaps because yet another Supreme Court decision reading the Fourth Amendment narrowly is not especially noteworthy or because the opinion's cursory and overly simplistic analysis equating law enforcement's reasonable mistakes of fact and law minimized the significance of the Court's decision. But the temptation to dismiss Heien as just another small …

Trying To Fit A Square Peg Into A Round Hole: Why Title Ii Of The Americans With Disabilities Act Must Apply To All Law Enforcement Services, Michael Pecorini

Journal of Law and Policy

Police use of force has been subject to greater scrutiny in recent years in the wake of several high-profile killings of African Americans. Less attention, however, has been paid to the increasingly routine violent encounters between police and individuals with mental illness or intellectual and development disabilities (“I/DD”). This is particularly problematic, as police have become the de-facto first responders to these individuals and far too often police responses to these individuals result in tragedy.

This Note argues that the Americans with Disabilities Act requires law enforcement to provide reasonable accommodations during their interactions with and seizures of individuals with …

Policing In The Era Of Permissiveness: Mitigating Misconduct Through Third-Party Standing, Julian A. Cook

Scholarly Works

On April 4, 2015, Walter L. Scott was driving his vehicle when he was stopped by Officer Michael T. Slager of the North Charleston, South Carolina, police department for a broken taillight. A dash cam video from the officer’s vehicle showed the two men engaged in what appeared to be a rather routine verbal exchange. Sometime after Slager returned to his vehicle, Scott exited his car and ran away from Slager, prompting the officer to pursue him on foot. After he caught up with Scott in a grassy field near a muffler establishment, a scuffle between the men ensued, purportedly …

Whither Reasonable Suspicion: The Supreme Court's Functional Abandonment Of The Reasonableness Requirement For Fourth Amendment Seizures, Steven P. Grossman

All Faculty Scholarship

Although the United States Supreme Court’s approach to issues governing application of the probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment has mutated over the years, at least one aspect of its approach has remained constant. Before information leading to probable cause or its lesser iteration of reasonable suspicion is found to exist, the government must demonstrate in some meaningful way the reliability of the person providing the information or of the information itself. Lacking such reliability, no search or seizure based on probable cause or reasonable suspicion is permitted. In its recent decision in Navarette v. California, the Court largely …

Filming The Police: An Interference Or A Public Service, Aracely Rodman

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

A Hurdle Too High: The Unconstitutionality Of Mandatory Ultrasounds Under Casey's Undue Burden Standard, Katarzyna Kordas

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that mandatory ultrasound laws impose an undue burden on women seeking abortions, violating the constitutional standard established in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. These laws, often enacted to dissuade women from proceeding with abortions, are deemed medically unnecessary and unconstitutional as they obstruct women's reproductive rights.

Dna And Distrust, Kerry Abrams, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past three decades, government regulation and funding of DNA testing has reshaped the use of genetic evidence across various fields, including criminal law, family law, and employment law. Courts have struggled with questions of when and whether to treat genetic evidence as implicating individual rights, policy trade-offs, or federalism problems. We identify two modes of genetic testing: identification testing, used to establish a person’s identity, and predictive testing, which seeks to predict outcomes for a person. Judges and lawmakers have often drawn a bright line at predictive testing, while allowing uninhibited identity testing. The U.S. Supreme Court in …

Fourth Amendment Time Machines (And What They Might Say About Police Body Cameras), Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Articles

When it comes to criminal investigation, time travel is increasingly possible. Despite longstanding roots in traditional investigation, science is today providing something fundamentally different in the form of remarkably complete digital records. And those big data records not only store our past, but thanks to data mining they are in many circumstances eerily good at predicting our future. So, now that we stand on the threshold of investigatory time travel, how should the Fourth Amendment and legislation respond? How should we approach bulk government capture, such as by a solar-powered drone employing wide-area persistent stare technology? Is it meaningfully different …

Lawn Signs: A Fourth Amendment For Constitutional Curmudgeons, Andrew Ferguson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

What is the constitutional significance of the proverbial "keep off the grass" sign? This question — asked by curmudgeonly neighbors everywhere — has been given new currency in a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court. Indeed, Florida v. Jardines might have bestowed constitutional curmudgeons with significant new Fourth Amendment protections. By expressing expectations regarding — and control over — access to property, "the people" may be able to claim greater Fourth Amendment protections not only for their homes, but also for their persons, papers, and effects. This article launches a constitutionally grounded, but lighthearted campaign of citizen education …

Neuro Lie Detection And Mental Privacy, Madison Kilbride, Jason Iuliano

Maryland Law Review

New technologies inevitably raise novel legal questions. This is particularly true of technologies, such as neuro lie detection, that offer new ways to investigate crime. Recently, a number of scholars have asked whether neuro lie detection testing is constitutional. So far, the debate has focused on the Fifth Amendment—specifically whether evidence gathered through neuro lie detection is constitutionally admissible because it is “physical” in nature or inadmissible because it is “testimonial” in nature. Under current Supreme Court doctrine, this Fifth Amendment debate is intractable. However, the more fundamental question of whether the government can compel individuals to undergo a neuro …

Privacy, Police Power, And The Growth Of Public Power In The Early Twentieth Century: A Not So Unlikely Coexistence, Carol Nackenoff

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.