For nearly forty-four years, the Supreme Court has adhered to the same test for its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, first announced in Justice Harlan\u27s concurrence in Katz v. United States. Despite the judiciary\u27s steadfast use of the test since its enunciation, the decisions since Katz have been anything but consistent. Most recently, this nation\u27s federal courts were confronted with questions about the legitimacy of using GPS tracking devices. In its attempt to resolve the issue, the Supreme Court\u27s decision in United States v. Jones strayed from applying Katz and instead relied on the common-law trespass doctrine. In an attempt to determine how society views the extent of its own privacy rights in the 21st century, this note ...
In 1967, the Supreme Court decided the landmark case of United States v. Katz, which engineered a pa...
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Jones clearly established that use of GPS tracking ...
The Fourth Amendment protects people’s reasonable expectations of privacy when there is an actual, s...
For nearly forty-four years, the Supreme Court has adhered to the same test for its Fourth Amendment...
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom from government intrusion into indi...
In a controversial decision in 2010, the D.C. Circuit held that warrantless GPS tracking of an autom...
While the Jones Court held unanimously that the Government’s use of a GPS device to track Antoine Jo...
This Article analyzes United States v. Jones, in which the Supreme Court considered whether governme...
Part I of this Article discusses the facts in People v. Weaver, the majority and dissenting opinions...
This Article discusses the implications of Jones in light of emerging technology capable of duplicat...
This Article takes the opportunity of the fortieth anniversary of Katz v. U.S. to assess whether the...
In Pineda-Moreno, the Ninth Circuit held that prolonged police monitoring of a defendant’s precise l...
With the advent of new technologies, the line as to where the Fourth Amendment forbids certain polic...
Judicial and scholarly assessment of emerging technology seems poised to drive the Fourth Amendment ...
This Article explains why the government’s physical surveillance can reach a point in terms of durat...
In 1967, the Supreme Court decided the landmark case of United States v. Katz, which engineered a pa...
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Jones clearly established that use of GPS tracking ...
The Fourth Amendment protects people’s reasonable expectations of privacy when there is an actual, s...
For nearly forty-four years, the Supreme Court has adhered to the same test for its Fourth Amendment...
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom from government intrusion into indi...
In a controversial decision in 2010, the D.C. Circuit held that warrantless GPS tracking of an autom...
While the Jones Court held unanimously that the Government’s use of a GPS device to track Antoine Jo...
This Article analyzes United States v. Jones, in which the Supreme Court considered whether governme...
Part I of this Article discusses the facts in People v. Weaver, the majority and dissenting opinions...
This Article discusses the implications of Jones in light of emerging technology capable of duplicat...
This Article takes the opportunity of the fortieth anniversary of Katz v. U.S. to assess whether the...
In Pineda-Moreno, the Ninth Circuit held that prolonged police monitoring of a defendant’s precise l...
With the advent of new technologies, the line as to where the Fourth Amendment forbids certain polic...
Judicial and scholarly assessment of emerging technology seems poised to drive the Fourth Amendment ...
This Article explains why the government’s physical surveillance can reach a point in terms of durat...
In 1967, the Supreme Court decided the landmark case of United States v. Katz, which engineered a pa...
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Jones clearly established that use of GPS tracking ...
The Fourth Amendment protects people’s reasonable expectations of privacy when there is an actual, s...