Wrong But Reasonable : The Fourth Amendment Particularity Requirement After United States v. Leon

This Note analyzes the application of the good-faith exception to search warrant particularity violations under the Fourth Amendment. The question compelled by United States v. Leon and Massachusetts v. Sheppard is when, if ever, a particularity-defective warrant will sustain an officer\u27s reasonable reliance.\u27\u27 The Note briefly discusses how particularity traditionally has been assessed under the fourth amendment. The author examines the Supreme Court\u27s holding in Massachusetts v. Sheppard, and contrasts several circuit court cases that have applied Sheppard\u27s objectively reasonable standard of good faith to warrants involving particularity defects. Finally, the Note concludes that the approach taken by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Buck is a preferable approach because it encourages courts to establish clearer standards for the particularity of warrants under the Fourth Amendment

Ghost Trees

The first contribution to PSF's "Verse in Place."  Each issue will feature a poem that explores the power of place in the world

Roadblocks to Effective Representation of Uncharged Indefinitely Imprisoned Clients at Guantanamo Bay Military Base

In Part I, this Note will discuss the current epidemic of human trafficking, the various ways the United Nations and the United States have attempted to combat trafficking, and highlight the importance of U.S. prosecutorial duties of witness protection that are especially implicated in human trafficking cases. Part II will present criticisms of efforts by the United Nations and the United States to protect victims of trafficking and their family members. This part will also focus on current U.S. protections afforded to families of human trafficking survivors and programs such as the Witness Security Program, from which U.S. lawmakers may model family protections. In Part III, this Note will argue that, despite an increase in cost, it is crucial that future legislative efforts expand current protection programs to better, and more quickly, protect families of victims. Offering family members in imminent harm derivative continued presence, currently only available to survivors of trafficking, is essential to the goals of U.S. trafficking legislation. Expanding protections for family members would accomplish three goals: (1) allow the survivor to feel secure in coming forward, knowing that her family members will not be harmed; (2) encourage survivors to come forward and cooperate with law enforcement officials, which could lead to further prosecutions of human traffickers and increase the protections offered to survivors of human trafficking; and (3) permit prosecutors to adhere to their duties of witness protection, which extend to family members who are in imminent danger due to the witnesses\u27 cooperation. This Article discusses the many barriers to effective representation and the lawyering realities on the ground at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. There are certainly many, but let me recount a recent experience

Everything\u27s Zen: Review of The Body Artist by Don DeLillo

Reading the beginning of Don DeLillo’s latest book feels like groping through a room in the blinding morning light before you’ve had a cup of coffee. Words flow from one impression to the next through the half-articulated thoughts of Laura, the body artist, who presses the “what’s it called, the lever” of the toaster as she performs her breakfast rituals

Wrong But Reasonable : The Fourth Amendment Particularity Requirement After United States v. Leon

This Note analyzes the application of the good-faith exception to search warrant particularity violations under the Fourth Amendment. The question compelled by United States v. Leon and Massachusetts v. Sheppard is when, if ever, a particularity-defective warrant will sustain an officer\u27s reasonable reliance.\u27\u27 The Note briefly discusses how particularity traditionally has been assessed under the fourth amendment. The author examines the Supreme Court\u27s holding in Massachusetts v. Sheppard, and contrasts several circuit court cases that have applied Sheppard\u27s objectively reasonable standard of good faith to warrants involving particularity defects. Finally, the Note concludes that the approach taken by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Buck is a preferable approach because it encourages courts to establish clearer standards for the particularity of warrants under the Fourth Amendment

Getting Conspiratorial: Review of: Conspiracy Culture: From Kennedy to the X-files by Peter Knight

Peter Knight begins his foray into the conspiratorial corners of popular culture with the following provocation: conspiracy theories are no longer the “delusional rantings” of the fringe elements in society, but rather constitute “many people’s normal way of thinking about who they are and how the world works.” Conspiracy theories, in his view, reflect a general skepticism of governmental authority, covert actions, “official” versions of history, and, more broadly, express a philosophical anxiety about agency and causality in these postmodern, poststructural times—and he argues that this skepticism is largely justified