New Police Surveillance Technologies And The Good-Faith Exception: Warrantless Gps Tracker Evidence After United States V. Jones,
2012
University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law
New Police Surveillance Technologies And The Good-Faith Exception: Warrantless Gps Tracker Evidence After United States V. Jones, Caleb Mason
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Defining Reasonable: The Implications Of State V. Mbacke On Fourth Amendment Protections,
2012
North Carolina Central University School of Law
Defining Reasonable: The Implications Of State V. Mbacke On Fourth Amendment Protections, David B. Mckaig
North Carolina Central Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rehnquist And Panvasive Searches,
2012
Vanderbilt University Law School
Rehnquist And Panvasive Searches, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In the history of the Supreme Court, William Rehnquist may have been the least friendly justice toward the view that the Fourth Amendment should be read expansively. Even he, however, might have interpreted the amendment to place more restrictions on modern law enforcement techniques than current caselaw does. Relying on a 1974 article authored by Rehnquist, this essay, written for a symposium on Rehnquist and the Fourth Amendment, describes his views on the types of requirements the Fourth Amendment imposes on the police, how decriminalization can protect privacy, and most importantly, why Rehnquist might have been willing to regulate surveillance …
Texting While Driving Meets The Fourth Amendment: Deterring Both Texting And Warrantless Cell Phone Searches,
2012
William & Mary Law School
Texting While Driving Meets The Fourth Amendment: Deterring Both Texting And Warrantless Cell Phone Searches, Adam M. Gershowitz
Faculty Publications
Recent laws criminalizing texting while driving are under-inclusive, ambiguous, and impose light punishments that are unlikely to deter. At the same time, the laws empower police to conduct warrantless searches of drivers’ cell phones. Texting while driving is dangerous and should be punished with stiff fines, possible jail time, license suspensions, and interlock devices that prevent use of phones while driving. However, more severe punishment will not eliminate police authority to conduct warrantless cell phone searches. This Article therefore proposes that legislatures allow drivers to immediately confess to texting while driving in exchange for avoiding a search of their phones. …
Constitutional Cacophony: Federal Circuit Splits And The Fourth Amendment,
2012
Vanderbilt University Law School
Constitutional Cacophony: Federal Circuit Splits And The Fourth Amendment, Wayne A. Logan
Vanderbilt Law Review
Despite their many differences, Americans have long been bound by a shared sense of constitutional commonality. Federal constitutional rights, however, can and do often vary based on geographic location, and a chief source of this variation stems from an unexpected origin: the nation's federal circuit courts of appeals. While a rich literature exists on federal circuit splits in general, this Article provides the first empirical study of federal constitutional law circuit splits. Focusing on Fourth Amendment doctrine in particular, the Article highlights the existence of over three dozen current circuit splits, which result in the unequal allocation of liberty and …
Looking Through The Prism Of Privacy And Trespass: Smartphones And The Fourth Amendment,
2012
University of the District of Columbia School of Law
Looking Through The Prism Of Privacy And Trespass: Smartphones And The Fourth Amendment, Saby Ghoshray
University of the District of Columbia Law Review
Technology in the twenty-first century has dramatically changed our lives, but the law has not kept pace with technological advances. The treatment of smartphones in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is no exception. This is made evident by the increasingly scattered outcomes of litigation involving the privacy interests of smartphone owners.' As the cross-jurisdictional inconsistencies of judicial decisions applying the Fourth Amendment to smartphones mount, I am drawn to seek answers from two foundational pillars of the Supreme Court's search and seizure jurisprudence: protection against invasions of privacy and the bulwark against trespass.
Warrantless Searches And Smartphones: Privacy In The Palm Of Your Hand?,
2012
University of the District of Columbia School of Law
Warrantless Searches And Smartphones: Privacy In The Palm Of Your Hand?, Margaret M. Lawton
University of the District of Columbia Law Review
Incident to a drug arrest, a police officer removes a smartphone from the pocket of the defendant. The smartphone may have incriminating evidence-phone numbers, pictures, text messages, and e-mails. But can the officer examine the smartphone on the scene or back at the station? Or does the officer need to show probable cause and obtain a warrant before examining the phone? If the phone were instead the arrestee's wallet or a cigarette package, under the search incident to lawful arrest exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement the officer could open and search inside either of these "containers." Anything found …
A Failure Of The Fourth Amendment & Equal Protection's Promise: How The Equal Protection Clause Can Change Discriminatory Stop And Frisk Policies,
2012
Villanova University School of Law
A Failure Of The Fourth Amendment & Equal Protection's Promise: How The Equal Protection Clause Can Change Discriminatory Stop And Frisk Policies, Brando Simeo Starkey
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Terry v. Ohio changed everything. Before Terry, Fourth Amendment law was settled. The Fourth Amendment had long required that police officers have probable cause in order to conduct Fourth Amendment invasions; to administer a "reasonable" search and seizure, the state needed probable cause. But in 1968, the Warren Court, despite its liberal reputation, lowered the standard police officers had to meet to conduct a certain type of search: the so-called "'stop' and 'frisk.'" A "stop and frisk" occurs when a police officer, believing a suspect is armed and crime is afoot, stops the suspect, conducts an interrogation, and pats him …
Eavesdropping Under New York And Federal Law: How New York Is Departing From Long-Standing Interpretations Mirroring Federal Law - People V. Rabb,
2012
Touro Law Center
Eavesdropping Under New York And Federal Law: How New York Is Departing From Long-Standing Interpretations Mirroring Federal Law - People V. Rabb, Bailey Ince
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Vehicle Checkpoints: The Ever-Expanding Array Of Purposes For Which A Vehicle May Be Stopped - People V. Gavenda,
2012
Touro Law Center
Vehicle Checkpoints: The Ever-Expanding Array Of Purposes For Which A Vehicle May Be Stopped - People V. Gavenda, Jan Lucas
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Roving Border Patrols In New York – Sometimes The Drug Smuggler Does Not Get Convicted: The Legal Limitations Regarding Vehicle Stops And Consent Searches Based Upon Reasonable Suspicion - People V. Banisadr,
2012
Touro Law Center
Roving Border Patrols In New York – Sometimes The Drug Smuggler Does Not Get Convicted: The Legal Limitations Regarding Vehicle Stops And Consent Searches Based Upon Reasonable Suspicion - People V. Banisadr, Robert Mitchell
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Do Automobile Passengers Have A Legitimate Expectation Of Privacy? An Analysis Of Reasonable Expectation Under The Fourth Amendment - People V. Howard,
2012
Touro Law Center
Do Automobile Passengers Have A Legitimate Expectation Of Privacy? An Analysis Of Reasonable Expectation Under The Fourth Amendment - People V. Howard, Lisa Belrose
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Search And Seizure: New York Vs. Federal Approach - People V. Keita,
2012
Touro Law Center
Search And Seizure: New York Vs. Federal Approach - People V. Keita, Tillie S. Mirman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Inevitable Discovery Rule - Justice Served Or Justice Thwarted? - People V. Pinckney,
2012
Touro Law Center
The Inevitable Discovery Rule - Justice Served Or Justice Thwarted? - People V. Pinckney, Danielle M. Hansen
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
It’S In The Bag: Voluntariness, Scope, And The Authority To Grant Consent - United States V. Harris,
2012
Touro Law Center
It’S In The Bag: Voluntariness, Scope, And The Authority To Grant Consent - United States V. Harris, Daniel Fier
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Social-Network Theory And The Diffusion Of The Search-And-Seizure Exclusionary Rule Among State Courts Between Weeks And Wolf,
2012
Brigham Young University Law School
Social-Network Theory And The Diffusion Of The Search-And-Seizure Exclusionary Rule Among State Courts Between Weeks And Wolf, Laurence A. Benner, Robert Bird, Donald J. Smythe
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law
No abstract provided.
Revisiting "Special Needs" Theory Via Airport Searches,
2012
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Revisiting "Special Needs" Theory Via Airport Searches, Alexander A. Reinert
Articles
Controversy has raged since the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) introduced Advanced Imaging Technology, capable of producing detailed images of travelers' bodies, and "enhanced" pat frisks as part of everyday airport travel. In the face of challenges in the courts and in public discourse, the TSA has justified the heightened security measures as a necessary means to prevent terrorist attacks. The purpose of this Essay is to situate the Fourth Amendment implications of the new regime within a broader historical context. Most germane, after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) introduced sweeping new screening of air travelers in the 1960s and 1970s …
Making The Most Of United States V. Jones In A Surveillance Society: A Statutory Implementation Of Mosaic Theory,
2012
Vanderbilt University Law School
Making The Most Of United States V. Jones In A Surveillance Society: A Statutory Implementation Of Mosaic Theory, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Jones, a majority of the Justices appeared to recognize that under some circumstances aggregation of information about an individual through governmental surveillance can amount to a Fourth Amendment search. If adopted by the Court, this notion sometimes called "mosaic theory"-could bring about a radical change to Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, not just in connection with surveillance of public movements-the issue raised in Jonesbut also with respect to the government's increasingly pervasive record-mining efforts. One reason the Court might avoid the mosaic theory is the perceived difficulty of implementing it. This article …
Unintentional Levels Of Force In §1983 Excessive Force Claims,
2012
William & Mary Law School
Unintentional Levels Of Force In §1983 Excessive Force Claims, Nathan R. Pittman
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Brady, Trust, And Error,
2012
Florida State University College of Law
Brady, Trust, And Error, Samuel R. Wiseman
Scholarly Publications
No abstract provided.
