Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Fourth Amendment and ESI
Courts have long acknowledged that searches of computers and other mediums storing electronic information (ESI) often involve a degree of intrusiveness much greater in quantity and in kind from searches of other containers. So one would have expected that given that the computer has been around for several decades including the use of the ubiquitous cell phone as one's "always at the ready" personal computer, the particularity rules for search warrants targeting ESI would be clearly defined. Sorry, kemo sabe, not today. Accordingly, this article will review some recent case law that spotlights this ever developing area of the law.
The Fourth Amendment's Warrant clause provides that "… no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." (Emphasis supplied.) U.S. Const. Amend. IV. When written, our founders' major concern was the so-called "general warrants" of the King used to harass and arrest anyone who dared question his authority. The founding generation "… reviled 'general warrants' and 'writs of assistance' of the colonial era, which allowed British officers to rummage through homes in an unrestrained search for evidence of criminal activity. Opposition to such searches was in fact one of the driving forces behind the revolution itself." Riley v California, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 2494 (2014) (Roberts, C.J.) See, e.g., Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. 79, 84 (1987); Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 467 (1971).
This premium content is locked for Cybersecurity Law & Strategy subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.