Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Does (Did) (Should) The Exclusionary Rule Rest On A 'Principled Basis' Rather Than An 'Empirical Proposition'?, Yale Kamisar

Articles

[U]ntil the [exclusionary rule] rests on a principled basis rather than an empirical proposition, [the rule] will remain in a state of unstable equilibrium. Mapp v. Ohio, which overruled the then twelve-year-old Wolf case and imposed the fourth amendment exclusionary rule (the Weeks doctrine) on the states as a matter of fourteenth amendment due process, seemed to mark the end of an era. Concurring in Mapp, Justice Douglas recalled that Wolf had evoked "a storm of constitutional controversy which only today finds its end."' But in the two decades since Justice Douglas made this observation, the storm of controversy has …

Prior Restraint Of Expression Through The Private Search Doctrine, Edward J. Eberle

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure Of America: The Case For Keeping The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Twenty years ago, concurring in Mapp v. Ohio (1961), Justice William 0. Douglas looked back on Wolf v. Colorado (1949) (which had held that the Fourth Amendment's substantive protection against "unreasonable search and seizure" was binding on the states through the due process clause, but that the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule was not) and recalled that the Wolf case had evoked "a storm of controversy which only today finds its end." But, of course, in the twenty years since Justice Douglas made that observation the storm of controversy has only intensified, and it has engulfed the exclusionary rule in federal …

How We Got The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule And Why We Need It, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Why the continuing storm of controversy over the exclusionary rule? Why the deep and widespread hostility to it? I think a recent law office search case, because it arose in a setting so unlike the typical search and seizure case, furnishes a clue. In O'Connor v. Johnson, St. Paul police obtained a warrant to search an attorney's office for business records of a client suspected of making false written statements in applying for a liquor license. The attorney happened to be present when the police arrived. Holding on to his work product file, which contained some of the records sought, …

Assaults On The Exclusionary Rule: Good Faith Limitations And Damage Remedies, Pierre J. Schlag

Publications

No abstract provided.

Full Faith And Credit, More Or Less, To Judgments: Doubts About Thomas V. Washington Gas Light Co., Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

Workmen's compensation awards, decrees of administrative tribunals rather than courts, present the question of how far the mandate of the full faith and credit clause should reach and whether the clause should bar a claimant from pursuing supplemental compensation in a second state. Recently, in Thomas v. Washington Gas Light Co., the Supreme Court decided that full faith and credit should not prevent a claimant from obtaining supplemental compensation. Professor Sterk criticizes the Court's analysis, demonstrating the Thomas Court's neglect of the federal interests that the clause should protect. After examining the clause and its policy underpinnings, Professor Sterk …

Constitutional Protection For Private Papers, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Capacity To Contest A Search And Seizure: The Passing Of Old Rules And Some Suggestions For New Ones, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Professor Slobogin examines recent Supreme Court decisions involving standing to challenge search and seizure violations, and argues that the Court's commitment to a "totality of the circumstances" approach has permitted erosion of fourth amendment protections. After concluding that these decisions provide little guidance to lower courts, Professor Slobogin offers a set of principles which will aid in analyzing the Court's direction.

Custodial Seizures And The Poison Tree Doctrine: Dunaway V. New York And Its Aftermath, 13 J. Marshall L. Rev. 733 (1980), Rosanne J. Faraci

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Law Office Search: An Emerging Problem And Some Suggested Solutions, Lackland H. Bloom Jr.

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

A law office search threatens the attorney-client relationship by jeopardizing values protected by the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments. After reviewing recent developments that underlie the sudden emergence of the law office search, Professor Bloom examines the nature of this threat and suggests that the values of the attorney-client relationship can be reconciled with the needs of law enforcement by requiring the police to use a subpoena rather than a search warrant when seeking documentary evidence from an attorney. Professor Bloom considers whether this "subpoena preference rule" either is required by the fourth amendment or can be implemented by nonconstitutional …

Franks V. Delaware: A Proposed Interpretation And Application, Peter A. Alces

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

United States V. Payner, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

The Exclusionary Rule In Historical Perspective: The Struggle To Make The Fourth Amendment More Than 'An Empty Blessing', Yale Kamisar

Articles

In the 65 years since the Supreme Court adopted the exclusionary rule, few critics have attacked it with as much vigor and on as many fronts as did Judge Malcolm Wilkey in his recent Judicature article, "The exclusionary rule: why suppress valid evidence?" (November 1978).

A Defense Of The Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar

Articles

The exclusionary rule is being flayed with increasing vigor by a number of unrelated sources and with a variety of arguments. Some critics find it unworkable and resort to empirically based arguments. Others see it as the product of a belated and unwarranted judicial interpretation. Still others, uncertain whether the rule works, are confident that in some fashion law enforcement's hands are tied. Professor Yale Kamisar, long a defender of the exclusionary rule, reviews the current attacks on the rule and offers a vigorous rebuttal. He finds it difficult to accept that there is a line for acceptable police conduct …

Exclusionary Rule: Reasonable Remarks On Unreasonable Search And Seizure, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Can we live with the so-called exclusionary rule, which bars the use of illegally gained evidence in criminal trials? Can the Fourth Amendment live without it? A growing number of lawyers and judges, including Chief Justice Warren Burger, have called for abandonment of the rule, usually on the ground that it has not prevented illegal searches and seizures and on the ground that the rule has contributed significantly to the increase in crime. No one has convincingly demonstrated a causal link between the high rate of crime in America and the exclusionary rule, and I do not believe that any …

Commonwealth Of Massachusetts V. White, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

An Examination Of The Naming Requirement Of Tittle Iii In Light Of United States V. Donovan - A Case For Suppression, William D. Goldberg

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Is The Exclusionary Rule An 'Illogical' Or 'Unnatural' Interpretation Of The Fourth Amendment?, Yale Kamisar

Articles

More than 50 years have passed since the Supreme Court decided the Weeks case, barring the use in federal prosecutions of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and the Silverthorne case, invoking what has come to be known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. The justices who decided those cases would, I think, be quite surprised to learn that some day the value of the exclusionary rule would be measured by-and the very life of the rule might depend on-an empirical evaluation of its efficacy in deterring police misconduct. These justices were engaged in a less …

Exclusionary Rule Need Not Be Applied In Federal Habeas Reviews Of State Convictions, Jann Johnson

Mercer Law Review

In Stone v. Powell, the U.S. Supreme Court held that if a state "has provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of a Fourth-Amendment claim, a state prisoner may not be granted federal habeas-corpus relief on the ground that evidence obtained in an unconstitutional search or seizure was introduced at trial."

Respondent Powell was convicted of second-degree murder in a California state court. A police officer had found the murder weapon on Powell during a search incident to his arrest for violation of a vagrancy ordinance, and the officer's testimony was admitted at trial over Powell's objection. Powell …

Search And Seizure In Alaska: A Comprehensive Review, Jeff M. Feldman

Articles

In the eighteen years since Alaska achieved statehood, fifty-two cases involving issues of search and seizure have reached the Alaska Supreme Court. This article will analyze these cases with an eyetowards outlining the law of search and seizure in Alaska, isolating those areas in which the Alaska Supreme Court has departed from prevailing search and seizure doctrine, and using past decisions to predict the probable outcomes to search and seizure issues still unresolved in Alaska.

Searches Without Warrants, Jerold H. Israel

Book Chapters

My primary area of concentration today is the search made without a warrant. Studies indicate that 95 percent or more of all searches are without warrants. It is quite understandable, then, that most of the search-and-seizure litigation concerns the validity of searches without warrants.

Recent Developments, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Custodial Police Interrogation In Our Nation's Capital: The Attempt To Implement Miranda, Richard J. Medalie, Leonard Zeitz, Paul Alexander

Michigan Law Review

In his attempt to define the meaning of democracy, Carl Becker, looking back to Plato's view of society, observed that "[a]ll human institutions, we are told, have their ideal forms laid away in heaven, and we do not need to be told that the actual institutions conform but indifferently to these ideal counterparts." Becker's observation may well set the perspective from which to view what occurred when the attempt was made in the District of Columbia to implement the Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona.

Search By Consent, Jerold H. Israel

Book Chapters

My topics this morning are eavesdropping, search by consent and entrance gained by fraud and deceit. You should be forewarned that these are areas in which the law has been "on the move" for the past few years. Changes have occurred and still more will take place in the future. I will attempt to anticipate some of those developments, but, obviously, the only safe course is keeping up-to-date through continuing education. In covering my assigned topics, I hope to paint with a rather broad brush. It has always been my feeling that the pohce officer cannot be expected to learn …

Recent Developments In The Law Of Search And Seizure, Jerold H. Israel

Book Chapters

This article is designed to provide a survey of recent decisions dealing with several important issues in the area of search and seizure. It is intended primarily as a basic collection of sources. I have, therefore, sought to keep my own commentary at a minimum and the citations to relevant cases at a maximum. Wherever space permits, I have let the courts speak for themselves. In most instances, however, it has been necessary to provide fairly general descriptions of the cases.

Constitutional Law - Search And Seizure - "Fruit Of Poisonous Tree" Doctrine - Jacobs V. Warden, 367 F.2d 321 (4th Cir. 1966), Gilbert A. Bartlett

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Family Law—Application Of The Rules Against Search And Seizure To Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings, Alan Eber

Buffalo Law Review

Matter of Williams, 49 Misc. 2d 154, 267 N.Y.S.2d 91 (Ulster County Family Ct. 1966).

Constitutional Law - Admissibility Of Evidence - Reasonable Search And Seizure. Hawley V. Commonwealth, 206 Va. 479 (1965), Robert E. Scott

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

A New Constitutional Limit For Electronic Surveillance Cases, Allan Zaleski

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Evidence Illegally Seized By Private Persons Excluded From Criminal Prosecution--People V. Mccomb, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

At common law, illegally seized evidence was admissible on the theory that the nature of the seizure did not necessarily affect the probative value of the evidence. However, in 1914 the United States Supreme Court, in order to protect the fourth amendment's guarantee of freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, adopted a rule excluding from federal courts evidence illegally seized by federal officials. In 1961, the scope of this rule was extended by Mapp v. Ohio, which held that all evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment is inadmissible in state courts. However, the Mapp doctrine applies only …