Fourth Amendment Commons^™

The Fourth Amendment In The Information Age, Ricardo J. Bascuas

Articles

In 2013, the Supreme Court tacitly conceded that the expectations-of-privacy test used since 1967 to assess claims of Fourth Amendment violations was inadequate. It asserted that the previous property-based test for Fourth Amendment violations had never despite widespread agreement to the contrary been overruled. The Court compounded its artfulness by applying a new, significantly weaker trespass test that, like the expectations-of-privacy test, enjoys no legal pedigree. This new trespass test, which is to be applied together with the expectations-of-privacy test, suffers from the same defect as the test it purportedly supplements. It does not require the government to respect private …

Implications Of United States V. Jones On Dna Collection Form Arrestees: Trespass Prohibited By The Fourth Amendment, Angelique Romero

St. Thomas Law Review

This comment discusses the constitutionality of warrantless DNA collection from arrestees, and proposes an analysis that the Supreme Court should use when deciding on this issue to find that this practice violates the Fourth Amendment. Part II of this comment discusses the general development of DNA collection laws, how the laws have expanded to include persons that have been arrested but not convicted of certain crimes, and the procedures used to collect the DNA samples. In addition, Part II includes a survey of the conflicting decisions by courts across the country and demonstrates the disagreement over the constitutionality of this …

Do The Federal Courts Sweep Buie Clean?, Jeffrey T. Wennar

Criminal Law Practitioner

No abstract provided.

From Selfies To Shackles: Why The Government May Be Able To Search Your Cell Phone Without A Warrant, Rochelle Brunot

Criminal Law Practitioner

No abstract provided.

The Mercenary Gap: How To Protect The Constitutional Rights Of American Contractors In The Age Of The Private Military Firm, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1121 (2013), John Sviokla

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Clever Contraband: Why Illinois’ Lockstep With The U.S. Supreme Court Gives Police Authority To Search The Bowels Of Your Vehicle, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 425 (2013), Jason Cooper

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Do You Know Where Your Dna Is? The Need For Dna Legislation In Ohio, Elizabeth Collins

Journal of Law and Health

This Note examines the several privacy and safety issues stemming from DNA theft. Part II discusses constitutional and common law regarding the abandonment of property, particularly under the Fourth Amendment, and explains how the Fourth Amendment does not protect individuals from DNA theft. Part III details the many consequences resulting from DNA theft. These risks, among countless others, include employment and insurance discrimination, family turmoil caused by paternity testing which is often inaccurate and conducted without consent, genetic stalking, security risks, and the unauthorized publication of personal medical information and ancestral information. Part IV examines DNA theft legislation adopted by …

Drug Testing, Welfare, And The Special Needs Doctrine: An Argument In Support Of Drug Testing Tanf Recipients, Brianna W. Mclaughlin

Cleveland State Law Review

In 1996, Congress considered situations of children like Michael Oher when they overhauled the welfare program through the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). One of the PRWORA’s goals is to protect children in homes receiving welfare benefits. A crucial step in the Congressional plan was authorizing states to drug test welfare recipients as a condition to receiving benefits. With this grant of authority, states enacted legislation to implement drug testing programs to protect children in welfare receiving homes from the dangers of drug addicted parents. In 2011, over thirty-six states proposed legislation requiring drug testing of welfare …

On The 'Considered Analysis' Of Collecting Dna Before Conviction, David H. Kaye

Faculty Scholarship

For nearly a decade, DNA-on-arrest laws eluded scrutiny in the courts. For another five years, they withstood a gathering storm of constitutional challenges. In Maryland v. King, however, Maryland's highest court reasoned that usually fingerprints provide everything police need to establish the true identity of an individual before trial and that the state's interest in finding the perpetrators of crimes by trawling databases of DNA profiles is too "generalized" to support "a warrantless, suspicionless search." The U.S. Supreme Court reacted forcefully. Chief Justice Roberts stayed the Maryland judgment, writing that "given the considered analysis of courts on the other side …

Culpability, Deterrence, And The Exclusionary Rule, Kit Kinports

Faculty Scholarship

This Article discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the concepts of culpability and deterrence in its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, in particular, in the opinions applying the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The contemporary Court sees deterrence as the exclusionary rule’s sole function, and the Article begins by taking the Court at its word, evaluating its exclusionary rule case law on its own terms. Drawing on three different theories of deterrence – economic rational choice theory, organizational theory, and the expressive account of punishment – the Article analyzes the mechanics by which the exclusionary rule deters unconstitutional searches and questions …

Everyman's Exclusionary Rule: The Exclusionary Rule And The Rule Of Law (Or Why Conservatives Should Embrace The Exclusionary Rule), Scott E. Sundby

Articles

No abstract provided.

Post-Jones: How District Courts Are Answering The Myriad Questions Raised By The Supreme Court's Decision In United States V. Jones, Jason D. Medinger

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comments: The Hidden Cost Of Rod And Rifle: Why State Fish And Game Laws Must Be Amended In Order To Protect Against Unreasonable Search And Seizure In The Great Outdoors, Bryan M. Mull

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Evolving Fourth Amendment: United States V. Jones, The Information Cloud, And The Right To Exclude, Ber-An Pan

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

'Lonesome Road': Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz

Faculty Publications

American states and municipalities have so many minor traffic regulations that every time a driver gets behind the wheel of a car he or she is likely to commit multiple violations. The violation of any traffic regulation empowers police officers to stop the vehicle, ticket and, in some states, arrest the motorist. Police are physically unable to stop and ticket, let alone arrest, every motorist committing a traffic violation. Instead, police are vested with unlimited discretion when choosing which motorists to stop, warn, ticket, or arrest. So long as there is probable cause for a traffic violation, courts will not …

American Bar Association Criminal Justice Standards On Law Enforcement Access To Third Party Records, Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Books and Book Chapters

Drafted over the past six years and adopted by the American Bar Association (ABA) House of Delegates in February, 2012, these Criminal Justice Standards on Law Enforcement Access to Third Party Records provide much needed guidance to legislatures, courts, and administrative agencies having to decide how to regulate law enforcement access to existing records in the hands of third parties. It is the first framework of its kind, and it can do much to improve the current system of ad hoc protections in both state and federal systems. Decision makers are struggling to determine when to permit law enforcement access …

After United States V. Jones, After The Fourth Amendment Third Party Doctrine, Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Articles

In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the proposition that the Government can surreptitiously electronically track vehicle location for an entire month without Fourth Amendment restraint. While the Court's three opinions leave much uncertain, in one perspective they fit nicely within a long string of cases in which the Court is cautiously developing new standards of Fourth Amendment protection, including a rejection of a strong third party doctrine. This Article develops that perspective and provides a cautiously optimistic view of where search and seizure protections may be headed.

More detail:

United States v. Jones, in which the …

Genetic Privacy & The Fourth Amendment: Unregulated Surreptitious Dna Harvesting, Albert E. Scherr

Georgia Law Review

Genetic privacy and police practices have come to the
fore in the criminal justice system. Case law and stories
in the media document that police are surreptitiously
harvesting the out-of-body DNA of putative suspects.
Some sources even indicate that surreptitious data
banking may also be in its infancy. Surreptitious
harvesting of out-of-body DNA by the police is currently
unregulated by the Fourth Amendment. The few courts
that have addressed the issue find that the police are free
to harvest DNA abandoned by a putative suspect in a
public place. Little in the nascent surreptitious harvesting
case law suggests that surreptitious …

“The Lady Of The House” Vs. A Man With A Gun: Applying Kyllo To Gun-Scanning Technology, Sean K. Driscoll

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Five Answers And Three Questions After United States V. Jones (2012), The Fourth Amendment "Gps Case", Benjamin J. Priester

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.