Fourth Amendment Commons^™

Section 1983, Martin A. Schwartz, Honorable George C. Pratt, Leon Friedman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fourth Amendment, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Police Trespass And The Fourth Amendment: A Wall In Need Of Mending, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

Part I of this article provides an overview of basic Fourth Amendment principles. Part II analyzes the Oliver and Ciraolo cases which define and distinguish residential "curtilage," protected by the Fourth Amendment, and "open fields," which the Fourth Amendment does not protect. Part III reviews the Dow decision's discussion of whether an industrial facility, like a residence, might have constitutionally protected curtilage. Part IV focuses on the Dunn decision, which dramatizes the curtilage-open field dichotomy while at the same time blurring the line between the two. Finally, part V shows how these decisions may have invalidated the "commercial curtilage" concept …

Police Liability For Creating The Need To Use Deadly Force In Self-Defense, Frank G. Zarb Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Police officers are granted wide discretion in the use of their firearms. Allowing officers some discretion is unavoidable, because they must often make difficult decisions in the face of rapidly changing circumstances. Officers, however, may abuse this discretion and cause injury or death unnecessarily. In the face of this danger of abuse by officers, suspects are, in many states, prohibited from defending themselves. While it is better to have a court decide when a police officer has abused his discretion than to allow the suspect to make that decision at the moment of arrest, it is not clear what standards …

A Middle Ground Approach To The Exclusionary Remedy: Reconciling The Redaction Doctrine With United States V. Leon, Rosemarie A. Lynskey

Vanderbilt Law Review

The fourth amendment to the United States Constitution commands that the right of individuals to be secure against unreasonable searches shall not be violated. The amendment further provides that a search warrant must be supported by probable cause and particularly describe the place to be searched and items to be seized.' The United States Supreme Court has held that the only effective means of enforcing this mandate is to suppress all evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant that violates the fourth amendment because it lacks either particularity or probable cause. Difficult questions arise, however, when a warrant contains some …

Warrantless Investigative Seizures Of Real And Tangible Personal Property By Law Enforcement Officers, Steven A.G. Davison

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Arizona V. Hicks: Probable Cause Requirement Under The Plain View Doctrine, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 903 (1988), Robert J. Kuker

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Griffin V. Wisconsin Warrantless Probation Searches - Do The State's Needs Warrant Such Strict Measures, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 921 (1988), William Blake Weiler

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Automobile Stops And Searches: The Law In Illinois, Ralph Ruebner

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Colorado V. Bertine: An Expansion Of The Inventory Doctrine As Applied To Vehicles And Its Impact On Illinois Law, Fred L. Alvarez

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Judicial Criticism, James Boyd White

Book Chapters

Today I shall talk about the criticism of judicial opinions, especially of constitutional opinions. This may at first seem to have rather little to do with our larger topic, "The Constitution and Human Values," but I hope that by the end I will be seen to be talking about that subject too. In fact I hope to show that in what I call our "criticism," our "values" are defined and made actual in most important ways.

I will begin with a double quotation. I recently heard my friend and colleague Alton Becker, who writes about language and culture, begin a …

Justice Kelleher And The Constitutions, Robert B. Kent

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Bright Line Seizures: The Need For Clarity In Determining When Fourth Amendment Activity Begins, Edwin J. Butterfoss

Faculty Scholarship

This Article proposes that the Mendenhall-Royer standard, as presently interpreted, should be discarded because it is unworkable and fails to strike the appropriate balance between the liberty interests of citizens and the interest of the state in combatting crime. The test is unworkable because the outcomes of cases turn on subtle factual distinctions unrelated to an individual's actual freedom to end an encounter with a police officer, making it difficult for police officers to apply the standard in the field and adjust their conduct accordingly. Moreover, the standard provides insufficient protection for an individual's rights by failing to consider the …

Fourth Amendment Standing: Flat On Its Face, Wallace W. Sherwood

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has recently reevaluated its concept of standing for claims involving violations of the fourth amendment. The apparent purpose for reevaluation of this fundamental constitutional principle was the Court's desire to respond to the debate currently raging over the scope of the exclusionary rule. Whether one perceives the fourth amendment as second to none in importance in the Bill of Rights or views it as a nuisance is not the issue here. Rather, the issue is whether, in its effort to limit the exclusionary rule, the Court has stripped the people of the United States of …

Fourth Amendment Right Or Fourth Amendment Wrong: Ins Power After The Immigration Reform And Control Act Of 1986, Steven L. Miller

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note examines the legal system's scrutiny of the fourth amendment implications of INS workplace sweeps and suggests that the recent adoption of the IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act) and its criminal sanctions dictate the development of a higher standard for upholding the constitutionality of workplace raids. Consideration is first given to the type of INS activity which is under scrutiny in the course of a workplace sweep. Next, Part III will examine the development of case law pertaining to the current power of the INS to constitutionally conduct workplace sweeps under the fourth amendment. Part IV will then …

Are State Courts Enforcing The Fourth Amendment? A Preliminary Study, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Case Digest, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Case Digest

Materiality Standard for Concealment or Misrepresentation under Immigration and Nationality Act § 1451(a) is Sufficient to Influence an Immigration and Naturalization Service Decision; The Test of Good Moral Character under § 1101(f)(6) Does Not Require a Finding of Materiality for any False Testimony --Kungys v. United States, 108 S. Ct. 1537 (1988)

The Broad Subpoena Power of the Immigration and Naturalization Service does not Authorize Issuance of a Blanket John Doe Subpoena to Gather Information Regarding Unidentified Aliens--Peters v. United States, 853 F.2d 692 (9th Cir.1988)

Routine Strip Searches of Detained Juvenile Aliens Violate Juveniles' Fourth Amendment Rights--Flores …

A Return To Fourth Amendment Basics: Undoing The Mischief Of Camara And Terry, Scott E. Sundby

Articles

No abstract provided.

Administrative Searches For Evidence Of Crime: The Impact Of New York V. Burger, Perry S. Reich

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Technologically Enhanced Visual Surveillance And The Fourth Amendment: Sophistication, Availability And The Expectation Of Privacy, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

Since 1983, however, seven Supreme Court decisions have focused at least in part upon application of the Fourth Amendment to technological enhancement of, or technological substitution for, visual surveillance: United States v. Dunn and Texas v. Brown (artificial illumination); United States v. Knotts and United States v. Karo (electronic tracking devices); California v. Ciraolo9 and Florida v. Riley (aerial surveillance); and Dow Chemical Co. v. United States (image-magnifying aerial photography). Reaction to many of these decisions has been highly critical.

In six of the seven cases, investigators refrained from intruding physically into a location protected by the Fourth Amendment. The …

A Linguistic Analysis Of The Meanings Of "Search" In The Fourth Amendment: A Search For Common Sense, Clark D. Cunningham

Faculty Publications By Year

This article offers a new technique for analyzing and evaluating competing interpretations of a legal text and applies that technique to one of the most debated questions of modern constitutional interpretation: the meaning of "searches" in the first clause of the fourth amendment. This Technique is called the "common sense" approach because it begins with a semantic analysis of the text in terms of the sense that the key words have in everyday speech. Such analysis reveals a complex of interlocked concepts that underlies the ability of speakers to recognize meaningful uses of these words. The common sense approach then …

Federalism, Separation Of Powers, And Individual Liberties, Dennis G. Lagory

Vanderbilt Law Review

In a world that the Framers hardly could have anticipated, the Constitution remains a singularly effective instrument for the pres- ervation of individual liberty. In its allocation of power between the states and the federal government, it provides Americans with multiple champions of their rights--the federal government, which protects a liberty that is constantly evolving to adapt traditional values to new realities, and the state governments, which protect the basic liberties to which mankind has always been entitled. In its allocation of power between the branches of the federal government, the Constitution provides us with a polity possessing powers adequate …

"Drug Testing Of Government Employees Should Not Be A Matter Of Fourth Amendment Concern" Cries A Lone Voice In A Wilderness Of Opposition, Ronald W. Truman

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Webster V. Doe, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

California V. Greenwood, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Defining The "Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy": An Emerging Tripartite Analysis, Richard G. Wilkins

Vanderbilt Law Review

A recent, illustrated version of the United States Constitution,issued in commemoration of its bicentennial, portrays the fourth amendment with a drawing of a home sitting atop the turret of a castle. The artistic statement aptly captures the common understanding of fourth amendment protections: A man's home is his castle, at least when it comes to governmental intrusions. Two recent Supreme Court decisions, however, that uphold the aerial surveillance of a suburban backyard and a commercial manufacturing facility, appear to challenge this popular perception. The home may be a castle-but that castle is impregnable only when nothing photogenic is occurring in …

'Comparative Reprehensibility' And The Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule, Yale Kamisar

Articles

It is not . . . easy to see what the shock-the-conscience test adds, or should be allowed to add, to the deterrent function of exclusionary rules. Where no deterrence of unconstitutional police behavior is possible, a decision to exclude probative evidence with the result that a criminal goes free to prey upon the public should shock the judicial conscience even more than admitting the evidence. So spoke Judge Robert H. Bork, concurring in a ruling that the fourth amendment exclusionary rule does not apply to foreign searches conducted exclusively by foreign officials. A short time thereafter, when an interviewer …

The Incorporation Doctrine And Procedural Due Process Under The Fourteenth Amendment: An Overview, Robert L. Cord

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Adoption Of Federal Law: Exploring The Limits Of Florida's "Forced Linkage" Amendment, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article examines the "forced linkage" between state and federal provisions that the 1983 amendment establishes in Florida. It concludes that forced linkage is ill-conceived, because it is inimical to state court independence. Accordingly, this article argues, the 1983 amendment to article I, section 12 of the Florida Constitution should be repealed. If not repealed, it should be interpreted to permit Florida courts broad discretion in developing their own stance on search and seizure law. So construed, the amendment would only require Florida courts to abide by those United States Supreme Court opinions that provide (1) an authoritative holding that …

City Of Palm Bay V. Bauman, 475 So. 2d 1322 (5th Dca 1985), Wm. Andrew Hamilton

Florida State University Law Review

Constitutional Law-DRUG TESTING OF FLORIDA'S PUBLIC EMPLOYEES: WHEN MAY A PUBLIC EMPLOYER REQUIRE URINALYSIS?