Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Let Sleeping Dogs Lie: Why The Supreme Court Should Leave Fourth Amendment History Unabridged, Tracey Maclin

UF Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Confessions, Search And Seizure, And The Rehnquist Court, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

About the time William Rehnquist ascended to the Chief Justiceship of the United States, two events occurred that increased the likelihood that Miranda would enjoy a long life.

In Moran v. Burbine, a six to three majority held that a confession preceded by an otherwise valid waiver of a suspect's Miranda rights should not be excluded either (1) because the police misled an inquiring attorney when they told her they were not going to question the suspect she called about or (2) because the police failed to inform the suspect of the attorney's efforts to reach him.

Although Burbine has …

The Writings Of John Barker Waite And Thomas Davies On The Search And Seizure Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar

Articles

After browsing through many volumes of the Michigan Law Review, searching for the article I would discuss on the occasion of the law review's 100th anniversary, I wound up with two "finalists": a 1955 article by Professor John Barker Waite on the law of arrest search and seizure (on further reflection, four Michigan Law Review commentaries on the general subject written by Waite between 1933 and 1955)' and a monumental 200-page article (surely one of the longest articles ever to appear in the Michigan Law Review) by Thomas Davies on the "original Fourth Amendment. 2

Ferguson V. City Of Charleston: Gatekeeper Of The Fourth Amendment's "Special Needs" Exception, Lucinda Clements

Campbell Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Evolution Of Drug Testing Of Interscholastic Athletes, Diane Heckman

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal (1994 - )

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure: Atwater V. City Of Lago Vista: The Due Process Dilemma Of Fourth Amendment Seizures For Traffic Violations, Amy J. Nelson

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Constitutional Crisis In The Digital Age: Why The Fbi's "Carnivore" Does Not Defy The Fourth Amendment, Aaron Y. Strauss

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Fbi Internet Surveillance: The Need For A Natural Rights Application Of The Fourth Amendment To Insure Internet Privacy, Catherine M. Barrett

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Last year, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) acknowledged that it used an Internet electronic surveillance system called Carnivore to investigate and prosecute criminal suspects in more than two dozen cases. Carnivore is a software program developed by the FBI that can be installed on the network of an Internet Service Provider (“ISP”), such as America Online, to monitor, intercept and collect e-mail messages and other Internet activity made and received by individuals suspected of criminal activity. To date, the full capability of Carnivore remains a secret—the FBI refuses to disclose the source code (computer language) that would reveal how …

Criminal Procedure: United States V. Holt: The Exception To The Exception That Swallows The Rule, J. Michael Hughes

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Magic Lantern Revealed: A Report Of The Fbi's New Key Logging Trojan And Analysis Of Its Possible Treatment In A Dynamic Legal Landscape, Woodrow Hartzog

Faculty Scholarship

Magic Lantern presents several difficult legal questions that are left unanswered due to new or non-existent statutes and case law directly pertaining to the unique situation that Magic Lantern creates. ²⁵ The first concern is statutory. It is unclear what laws, if any, will apply when Magic Lantern is put into use.²⁶ The recent terrorist attacks in the United States have brought the need for information as a matter of national security to the forefront. Congress recently passed legislation (i.e. USA PATRIOT Act) ²⁷ that dramatically modifies current surveillance law, thus further complicating the untested waters of a …

To Breathe, Or Not To Breathe: Passive Alcohol Sensors And The Fourth Amendment

San Diego Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Deadly Cure: The Supreme Court's Dangerous Medicine In Ferguson V. City Of Charleston, George M. Dery Iii

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Constitutional Worlds Colide: Resurrecting The Framers' Bill Of Rights And Criminal Procedure, George C. Thomas Iii

Michigan Law Review

For two hundred years, the Supreme Court has been interpreting the Bill of Rights. Imagine Chief Justice John Marshall sitting in the dim, narrow Supreme Court chambers, pondering the interpretation of the Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process in United States v. Burr. Aaron Burr was charged with treason for planning to invade the Louisiana Territory and create a separate government there. To help prepare his defense, Burr wanted to see a letter written by General James Wilkinson to President Jefferson. In ruling on Burr's motion to compel disclosure, Marshall departed from the literal language of the Sixth Amendment - …

The Long Distance Remand: Florida V. Bostick And The Re-Awakened Bus Search Battlefront In The War On Drugs, Dennis J. Callahan

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Fourth Frontier: With No Clear Path Prepared, Court Takes On Two More Police Powers Cases, Kathryn R. Urbonya

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

True Threats: Evolving Mens Rea Requirements For Violations Of 18 U.S.C. § 875(C), Justin Myer Lichterman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Curbside Justice: Court Gives Police The Green Light To Arrest For Minor Infractions, Kathryn R. Urbonya

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Determining Reasonableness Under The Fourth Amendment: Physical Force To Control And Punish Students, Kathryn R. Urbonya

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

An Empirically Based Comparison Of American And European Regulatory Approaches To Police Investigation, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article takes a comparative and empirical look at two of the most significant methods of police investigation: searches for and seizures of tangible evidence and interrogation of suspects. It first compares American doctrine regulating these investigative tools with the analogous rules predominant in Europe (specifically, England, France and Germany). It then discusses research on the American system that sheds light on the relative advantages and disadvantages of the two regulatory systems. More often than not, the existing data call into question preconceived notions of what "works." In particular, American reverence for search warrants, the exclusionary rule, and "Miranda" warnings …

Personal Does Not Always Equal "Private": The Constitutionality Of Requiring Dna Samples From Convicted Felons And Arrestees, Martha L. Lawson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the past couple of decades, the use of DNA testing has become a major debate in criminal law. Many Americans have called for regular use of DNA testing in criminal cases, particularly in the aftermath of the O.J. Simpson murder trial. While these tests can potentially help better ensure justice conducting DNA tests raises fundamental personal privacy concerns. This Note analyzes the development of DNA testing throughout the United States, giving a historical account of how the courts and local police departments have dealt with this testing Finally, the Note argues that the government's interest in mandatory testing of …

How Random And Suspicionless May School Searches Be?: Doubting Joy V. Penn-Harris-Madison School Corporation, Jon Eskelsen

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Miranda, The Constitution, And Congress, David A. Strauss

Michigan Law Review

Are Miranda warnings required by the Constitution, or not? If they are, why has the Supreme Court repeatedly said that the rights created by Miranda are "not themselves rights protected by the Constitution"? If not, why can't an Act of Congress, such as 18 U.S.C. 3501, declare them to be unnecessary? These were the central questions posed by United States v. Dickerson. It is not clear that the majority opinion ever really answered them. The majority said that "Miranda is constitutionally based," that Miranda has "constitutional underpinnings," that Miranda is "a constitutional decision," and that Miranda "announced a constitutional rule." …

Miranda'S Mistake, William J. Stuntz

Michigan Law Review

The oddest thing about Miranda is its politics - a point reinforced by the decision in, and the reaction to, Dickerson v. United States. In Dickerson, the Supreme Court faced the question whether Miranda ought to be overturned, either directly or by permitting legislative overrides. The lawyers, the literature, and the Court split along right-left - or, in the Court's case, right-center - lines, with the right seeking to do away with Miranda's restrictions on police questioning, and the left (or center) seeking to maintain them. The split is familiar. Reactions to Miranda have always divided along ideological lines, with …

The Paths Not Taken: The Supreme Court's Failures In Dickerson, Paul G. Cassell

Michigan Law Review

Where's the rest of the opinion? That was my immediate reaction to reading the Supreme Court's terse decision in Dickerson, delivered to me via email from the clerk's office a few minutes after its release. Surely, I thought, some glitch in the transmission had eliminated the pages of discussion on the critical issues in the case. Yet, as it became clear that I had received all of the Court's opinion, my incredulity grew.

Miranda, Dickerson, And The Puzzling Persistence Of Fifth Amendment Exceptionalism, Stephen J. Schulhofer

Michigan Law Review

Dickerson v. United States preserves the status quo regime for judicial oversight of police interrogation. That result could be seen, in the present climate, as a victory for due process values, but there remain many reasons for concern that existing safeguards are flawed - that they are either too restrictive or not restrictive enough. Such concerns are partly empirical, of course. They depend on factual assessments of how much the Miranda rules do restrict the police. But such concerns also reflect a crucial, though often unstated, normative premise; they presuppose a certain view of how much the police should be …

Questioning The Relevance Of Miranda In The Twenty-First Century, Richard A. Leo

Michigan Law Review

Miranda v. Arizona is the most well-known criminal justice decision - arguably the most well-known legal decision - in American history. Since it was decided in 1966, the Miranda decision has spawned voluminous newspaper coverage, political and legal debate, and academic commentary. The Miranda warnings themselves have become so well-known through the media of television that most people recognize them immediately. As Patrick Malone has pointed out, the Miranda decision has added its own lexicon of words and phrases to the American language. Perhaps with this understanding in mind, George Thomas recently suggested that the Miranda warnings are more well-known …

Identifying And (Re)Formulating Prophylactic Rules, Safe Harbors, And Incidental Rights In Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Susan R. Klein

Michigan Law Review

The Miranda conundrum runs something like this. If the Miranda decision represents true constitutional interpretation, and all unwarned statements taken during custodial interrogation are "compelled" within the meaning of the Self-Incrimination Clause, the impeachment and "fruits" exceptions to Miranda should fall. If it is not true constitutional interpretation, than the Court has no business reversing state criminal convictions for its violation. I offer here what I hope is a satisfying answer to this conundrum, on both descriptive and normative levels, that justifies not only Miranda but a host of similar Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist Court decisions as well. In Part …

Separated At Birth But Siblings Nonetheless: Miranda And The Due Process Notice Cases, George C. Thomas Iii

Michigan Law Review

Paraphrasing Justice Holmes, law is less about logic than experience. Courts and scholars have now had thirty-four years of experience with Miranda v. Arizona, including the Court's recent endorsement in Dickerson v. United States last Term. Looking back over this experience, it is plain that the Court has created a Miranda doctrine quite different from what it has said it was creating. I think the analytic structure in Dickerson supports this rethinking of Miranda. To connect the dots, I offer a new explanation for Miranda that permits us to reconcile Dickerson and the rest of the post-Miranda doctrine with the …

In The Stationhouse After Dickerson, Charles D. Weisselberg

Michigan Law Review

Miranda v. Arizona established the high water mark of the protections afforded an accused during a custodial interrogation. During the decades that followed, the United States Supreme Court allowed Miranda's foundation to erode, inviting a direct challenge to the landmark ruling. In Dickerson v. United States, the Court turned back such a challenge and placed Miranda upon a more secure, constitutional footing. This Article explores the impact of Dickerson in the place where Miranda was meant to matter most: the stationhouse. As I have described elsewhere, Supreme Court decisions have influenced a number of California law enforcement agencies to instruct …

Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far Is Too Far?, Laurie Magid

Michigan Law Review

Virtually all interrogations - or at least virtually all successful interrogations - involve some deception. As the United States Supreme Court has placed few limits on the use of deception, the variety of deceptive techniques is limited chiefly by the ingenuity of the interrogator. Interrogators still rely on the classic "Mutt and Jeff," or "good cop, bad cop," routine. Interrogators tell suspects that nonexistent eyewitnesses have identified them, or that still at-large accomplices have given statements against them. Interrogators have been known to put an unsophisticated suspect's hand on a fancy, new photocopy machine and tell him that the "Truth …