Search for: "People v. Orin"
Results 261 - 280
of 580
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Apr 2014, 10:24 am
I am pleased to report that the Third Circuit has entered a ruling in United States v. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 5:07 am
See United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2014, 2:35 pm
Ortberg v. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 10:15 pm
Fortunately, reason has prevailed: In a decision handed down Thursday, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court in People v. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 3:41 pm
(For Orin’s analysis of King, see this post.) [read post]
1 Feb 2014, 6:55 am
And Wells linked to a District Court ruling in United States v. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 12:07 pm
(Orin Kerr) Reading Tim Sandefur’s first guest post, I have a quick clarifying question. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 2:37 pm
And yet, following the DC Circuit's decision in United States v Maynard (which eventually became United States v Jones when it was decided by the Supreme Court), individual jurists and scholars have increasingly embraced a mosaic theory of the Fourth Amendment, under which a discrete action (watching someone in public, seeking their phone records via a grand jury subpoena) becomes unconstitutional when government officials engage in that action too intensively and for too… [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 12:05 am
(Orin Kerr) Here’s a thought experiment. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 3:54 pm
Of course, I realize that some people hate Smith v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 11:55 am
As a result, people today have an “entirely different” relationships to phones than they did in 1979. [read post]
14 Dec 2013, 5:54 pm
Orin Kerr and David Kopel both analyze the case at Volokh Conspiracy. [read post]
14 Dec 2013, 1:35 am
Buhman is much clearer and carefully-reasoned that Orin finds it to be. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 10:30 pm
(Orin Kerr) In his post below, Eugene notes the new decision in Brown v. [read post]
7 Dec 2013, 8:00 am
Detention: In Ali v. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 10:11 am
(Orin Kerr) Yesterday the Fourth Circuit handed down an interesting Fourth Amendment decision in United States v. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 4:27 pm
Many people think that the Court should adopt 2 or 3 but not 1, because 1 is in some senses the most “broad. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 11:55 am
,Bates v. [read post]
18 Nov 2013, 7:03 am
By Kerr's reckoning, their arguments were "essentially playing out the majority and dissenting opinions in United States v. [read post]
13 Nov 2013, 8:10 am
I recently posted another excerpt from my concluding essay, which discussed the legal significance of the Court’s decision in NFIB v. [read post]
