Fourth Amendment Commons^™

United States V. Dzialak: The General Search Warrant - A Void In Judicial Logic, Michael F. Easley

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

U.S. V. Robinson: What Is Reasonable, Robert C. Williams

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law Notes: The Preliminary Hearing As A Constitutional Requirement, F. Thomas Schornhorst

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Fourth Amendment - Conduct Of An Effective Foreign Policy Demands That Presidential Power To Conduct Electronic Surveillance For Foreign Affaris Purposes Not Be Subjected To Warrant Requirement, And That Subsequent Judicial Review Be Limited, Mark R. Cuker

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Sources Of The Penumbral Right To Privacy, R. H. Clark

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Fourth Amendment - A Witness May Not Invoke The Exclusionary Rule To Suppress Evidence Before The Grand Jury Or As A Basis For Refusing To Answer Questions Based On Evidence Seized In Violation Of His Fourth Amendment Rights, Leland G. Ripley

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Automobile Inventory Search And Cady V. Dombrowski, Robert M. Hall

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Airport Searches And The Right To Travel: Some Constitutional Questions, Donald Applestein

Cleveland State Law Review

Historically the constitutional right to travel has arisen in two contexts. First, it has arisen within the context of the competing interests of the individual to travel internationally and the interest in national security. The other is that in which an individual wishes to travel to some area, and the government restricts that right in an effort to protect the persons in the area to which the individual wishes to travel. However, under the current airport screening procedures the right to travel may be being restricted or interfered with in another context: prevention and detection of criminal activity. This note …

The Fourth Amendment As A Way Of Talking About People: A Study Of Robinson And Matlock, James Boyd White

Articles

One way to regard what the Supreme Court has done in the cases it has decided under the Fourth Amendment is to say that it has created a specialized discourse of adjudication, a language in which it can talk about and dispose of the repeated conflicts that arise between an officer engaged in the process of crime control and a citizen upon whose freedom or security he intrudes. The events which bring these two figures together are bewildering in their variety and complexity, and the claims on each side are deeply felt and strenuously made. It has not been easy …

Katz And The Fourth Amendment: A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy Or, A Man's Home Is His Fort, Richard L. Aynes

Cleveland State Law Review

While there are a great many cases and commentaries treating fourth amendment rights, little attention has been given to the circumstances that must exist in order for it to be said that a search and seizure has taken place. The purpose of this note is to explore the issues involved in determining when the conduct of law enforcement officers constitutes a search and seizure. Consideration will be given to Katz v. United States, which established the test to be applied in making this determination; to the application of Katz and its effect upon fourth amendment protections; to alternatives for the …

United States V. Robinson, Thomas E. Downey Jr., Patrick J. Alcox, Thomas F. Harper, Michael Kieffer

Cleveland State Law Review

This article provides an overview of fourth amendment litigation that focused on the question of what constitutes an “unreasonable” search. The Supreme Court had previously provided guidance in Terry v. Ohio and Chimel v. California. This article provides a brief overview of these cases, and then it turns to more thoroughly examine the decision in US v. Robinson.

Recent Decisions, Stanley D. Miller, G. Cranwell Montgomery, Douglas I. Friedman

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Recent Decisions

Admiralty--Maritime Wrongful Death Action--A Maritime Wrongful Death Action for Unseaworthiness Alleging Loss of Support, Services, Society and Funeral Expenses is not Barred by Decedent's Recovery of Damages for Personal Injuries during His Lifetime

Stanley D. Miller

============================

Constitutional Law--Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure--Without Consent, Warrant or Probable Cause, A Roving Patrol Search of a Vehicle Twenty-Five Miles from Border is an Unreasonable Search and Seizure within Meaning of Fourth Amendment

G. Cranwell Montgomery

==============================

Jurisdiction--Securities Exchange Act of 1934--Section 10(b) applies to Fraudulent Transaction in Unlisted Foreign Securities when the Only Conduct within the United States is the …

Criminal Law Notes: Fourth Amendment Developments And Their Impact Upon The Criminal Process In Indiana, F. Thomas Schornhorst

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure- Knowledge Of Fourth Amendment Rights Not A Prerequisite To A Valid Consent Search

University of Richmond Law Review

The fourth amendment to the United States Constitution, applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment, guarantees to every citizen the indefeasible right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. As a response to a long history of English colonial abuses, the fourth amendment was intended by the drafters of the Bill of Rights to be a safeguard against governmental misuse of the writs of assistance' and the general warrant. The Supreme Court has broadly interpreted the constitutional mandate of the fourth amendment as proscribing all searches and seizures which do not comply with its stringent provisions. However, certain …

Search And Seizure- Permissible Scope Of A Search Incident To A Valid Custodial Arrest

University of Richmond Law Review

While the fourth amendment does not make a warrant mandatory for all searches, it does require that all searches meet the test of reasonableness. The search incident to a lawful arrest is one of the well-established exceptions to the warrant requirement. The incidental search doctrine and the exclusionary rule were first discussed by the United States Supreme Court in Weeks v. United States. The Supreme Court's failure to enunciate definitive standards in defining the permissible scope of a search incident to an arrest has created numerous problems for the courts and police. The limitations on the permissible scope of a …

Terry And The Pirates: Constitutionality Of Airport Searches And Seizures, James A. Brodsky

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Is The Exclusionary Rule In Failing Health? Some New Data And A Plea Against A Precipitous Conclusion, Bradley C. Canon

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Constitutionality Of Airport Searches, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note will discuss airport searches in comparison to several situations in which the courts have found that the requirements of the fourth amendment do not apply or are satisfied even in the absence of a warrant: border searches, administrative searches, stop-and-frisk searches, and searches under express or implied consent. None of these are perfectly analogous to the present airport procedures. Therefore, if airport searches are to be allowed, either the procedures must be modified to fit the established exceptions, or a new exception to the warrant requirement of the fourth amendment must be created.

Airport Freight And Passenger Searches: Application Of Fourth Amendment Standards

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitutional Dilemma Of A Person Predisposed To Criminal Behavior, John A. Chandler, Stanley F. Rose

Vanderbilt Law Review

The basic premise of American criminal jurisprudence is that individuals are capable of controlling their behavior.' The threat of incarceration is intended to be a deterrent to antisocial conduct. State and federal penal systems are called "correctional institutions"--implying that a person is incarcerated in order to modify unacceptable behavior. Criminal laws are drafted with goals of discouraging antisocial conduct,punishing and reforming the guilty, and protecting society against dangerous individuals. The first two purposes are served only if a person can respond to negative reinforcement by conducting himself in socially acceptable ways. Individuals incapable of controlling antisocial behavior are not accounted …

The Fourth Amendment At The Airport: Arriving, Departing Or Cancelled?, Joel Gora

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Constitution As Positive Law, Richard W. Wright

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Almeida-Sanchez V. United States, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Schneckloth V. Bustamonte, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

The Constitutionality Of The Anti-Hijacking Security System, Abraham Abramovsky

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Actionable Wrongs - Fourth Amendment Held To Be Basis Of Cause Of Action For Damages Against Federal Officers For Illegal Search And Seizure, Ann Rosen

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Concept Of Privacy And The Fourth Amendment, Steven C. Douse

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article attempts at a minimum to offer a common background and frame of reference for defining and comparing myriad facets of the law. If successful, they furnish a model for the integration of these many facets. This inquiry begins with an examination of the proposition that the essence of the fourth amendment is protection of a right of privacy. The concept of privacy is then defined and elaborated, both without and within the constitutional context. These conclusions are further extended in an exploration of mechanisms for defining the invasions and protection of fourth amendment privacy.

The Privacy Interest Of The Fourth Amendment--Does Mapp V. Ohio Protect It Or Pillage It, Dennis C. Sauter

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Review, Lyman R. Patterson

Vanderbilt Law Review

A revolution wrought by judges with the pen is more rare than one carried out by citizens with arms. The Warren Court did make a revolution--"the due process revolution," as the-- author calls it--and it is this transformation in our law that is the subject of Fred Graham's book, The Self-Inflicted Wound. The wound referred to in the title is Miranda v. Arizona,' in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that before the police can interrogate an accused in custody, they must warn him that he is entitled to a lawyer and that anything he says may …

United States V. United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Michigan, Southern Division, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.