U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

SOME OBSERVATIONS AND PROPOSALS ON THE NATURE OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT

NCJ Number
51678
Journal
George Washington Law Review Volume: 46 Issue: 4 Dated: (MAY 1978) Pages: 529-580
Author(s)
R J BACIGAL
Date Published
1978
Length
52 pages
Annotation
REGULATION OF GOVERNMENT POWER (THE LIMITATION PERSPECTIVE) AND ASSURANCE OF THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY (THE INDIVIDUAL PERSPECTIVE) ARE EXPLORED AS ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO ANALYZING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.
Abstract
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTS PEOPLE AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. THE FAILURE OF THE JUDICIARY TO ARTICULATE THE PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT HAS RESULTED IN A LACK OF CONSISTENCY AND CLARITY IN FOURTH AMENDMENT DECISIONS. ONE QUESTION THAT HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED IS WHETHER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT SHOULD BE VIEWED FROM AN INDIVIDUAL PERSPECTIVE, WHICH EMPHASIZES PROTECTION OF THE INTERESTS OF INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS AND DISREGARDS THE MOTIVES BEHIND GOVERNMENTAL ACTIONS, OR FROM A LIMITATION PERSPECTIVE, WHICH EMPHASIZES REGULATION OF GOVERNMENTAL CONDUCT. THE TWO PERSPECTIVES ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, BUT SELECTION OF ONE OVER THE OTHER CAN PRODUCE DIFFERENT LEGAL RESULTS. THE SUPREME COURT HAS NOT EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGED THE EXISTENCE OF A CHOICE OF PERSPECTIVES, BUT APPARENTLY HAS ADOPTED THE INDIVIDUAL PERSPECTIVE BY FREQUENTLY EMPHASIZING THAT FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS ARE PERSONAL RIGHTS. HOWEVER, THE LIMITATION PERSPECTIVE UNDERLIES THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND OCCASIONALLY APPEARS IN SUPREME COURT OPINIONS. IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT DECISIONS IN FOURTH AMENDMENT CASES MAY DEPEND ON THE PERSPECTIVE EMPLOYED BY THE COURT, BOTH PERSPECTIVES ARE ANALYZED AND EVALUATED AS DETERMINANTS OF THE REACH OF FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION IN SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE INDIVIDUAL PERSPECTIVE ALONE IS AN INADEQUATE MODEL WITH WHICH TO EVALUATE ALL INTERESTS RELEVANT TO FOURTH AMENDMENT PROBLEMS. THE COURTS MUST ACCOMMODATE BOTH PERSPECTIVES IN FOURTH AMENDMENT DECISIONS. BY EMPHASIZING THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE AMENDMENT, COURTS COULD RECOGNIZE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS, A REQUIREMENT FOR POLICE TO OBTAIN A SEARCH WARRANT IN OTHERS, AND A GENERAL CONCEPT OF REASONABLENESS TO LIMIT GOVERNMENT POWER IN STILL OTHERS. ACCEPTANCE OF THE HISTORICAL AND THEORETICAL VALIDITY OF THE LIMITATION PERSPECTIVE AND RECOGNITION OF THE CONCEPTUAL PROBLEMS INHERENT IN THE INDIVIDUAL PERSPECTIVE CAN ELIMINATE JUDICIAL RELUCTANCE TO REGULATE GOVERNMENT ACTION BY USING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT. A TENTATIVE MODEL FOR USING THE LIMITATION PERSPECTIVE IN SOLVING FOURTH AMENDMENT PROBLEMS IS PROVIDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--LKM)

Downloads

No download available

Availability