Dirty silver platters: The enduring challenge of intergovernmental investigative illegality

Iowa Law Review

Volumn 99, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 293-329

  Logan, Wayne A ^a  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893058531     PISSN: 00210552     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Julius Berman & Paul Oberst, Admissibility of Evidence Obtained by an Unconstitutional Search and Seizure-Federal Problems, 55 NW. U. L. REV. 525, 551 (1960)
2. Robert M. Bloom & Hillary Massey, Accounting for Federalism in State Courts: Exclusion of Evidence Obtained Lawfully by Federal Agents, 79 U. COLO. L. REV. 381 (2008);
3. James W. Diehm, New Federalism and Constitutional Criminal Procedure: Are We Repeating the Mistakes of the Past?, 55 MD. L. REV. 223 (1996)
4. David Gray et al., The Supreme Court's Contemporary Silver Platter Doctrine, 91 TEX. L. REV. 7 (2012);
5. Randall T. Shepard, In a Federal Case, Is the State Constitution Something Important or Just Another Piece of Paper?, 46 WM. & MARY L. REV. 1437, 1452 (2005).
6. Yale Kamisar, Wolf and Lustig Ten Years Later: Illegal State Evidence in State and Federal Courts, 43 MINN. L. REV. 1083 (1959).
7. John Barker Waite, Judges and the Crime Burden, 54 MICH. L. REV. 169, 172 n.9 (1955)
8. BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, U.S. DEP'T OF JUSTICE, CREATING A NEW CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM FOR THE 21ST CENTURY 79 (2000), available at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bja/178936.pdf
9. NAT'L INST. OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEP'T OF JUSTICE, FIGHTING URBAN CRIME: THE EVOLUTION OF FEDERAL-LOCAL COLLABORATION 2 (2003), available at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/197040.pdf
10. Wayne A. Logan, Constitutional Cacophony: Federal Circuit Splits and the Fourth Amendment, 65 VAND. L. REV. 1137, 1172 (2012)
11. Francis Barry McCarthy, Counterfeit Interpretations of State Constitutions in Criminal Procedure, 58 SYRACUSE L. REV. 79, 92 n.70 (2007)
12. Robert Post, Federalism, Positive Law, and the Emergence of the American Administrative State: Prohibition in the Taft Court Era, 48 WM. & MARY L. REV. 1, 5 n.6 (2006).
13. Noel T. Dowling, Concurrent Power Under the Eighteenth Amendment, 6 MINN. L. REV. 447 (1922).
14. Edward Rubin, A Statistical Study of Federal Criminal Prosecutions, 1 LAW & CONTEMP. PROBS. 494, 497 tbl.1 (1934).
15. J.P. Chamberlain, Enforcement of the Volstead Act Through State Agencies, 10 A.B.A. J. 391, 391 (1924)
16. R.J.S., Comment, Prohibition Searches by New York State Police, 37 YALE L.J. 784, 785 (1928)
17. Alan C. Kohn, Admissibility in Federal Court of Evidence Illegally Seized by State Officers, 1959 WASH. U. L.Q. 229;
18. Gerald H. Galler, The Exclusion of Illegal State Evidence in Federal Courts, 49 J. CRIM. L. CRIMINOLOGY & POLICE SCI. 455 (1959);
19. Judson A. Parsons, Jr., State-Federal Crossfire in Search and Seizure and Self Incrimination, 42 CORNELL L.Q. 346 (1957)
20. Potter Stewart, The Road to Mapp v. Ohio and Beyond: The Origins, Development and Future of the Exclusionary Rule in Search-and-Seizure Cases, 83 COLUM. L. REV. 1365 (1983).
21. Laurence A. Benner et al., Social-Network Theory and the Diffusion of the Search-and-Seizure Exclusionary Rule Among State Courts Between Weeks and Wolf, 27 BYU J. PUB. L. 97, 120 (2012)
22. Jeffrey E. Nicoson, Note, A Case for Certiorari: Whether Federal Courts Should Consider State Law When Admitting State-Collected Electronic Surveillance Evidence, 46 U. LOUISVILLE L. REV. 335, 349-50 & n.142 (2007).
23. Mary D. Fan, The Police Gamesmanship Dilemma in Criminal Procedure, 44 U.C. DAVIS L. REV. 1407 (2011);
24. Margaret Raymond, The Right to Refuse and the Obligation to Comply: Challenging the Gamesmanship Model of Criminal Procedure, 54 BUFF. L. REV. 1483 (2007).
25. Deborah Young, Unnecessary Evil: Police Lying in Interrogations, 28 CONN. L. REV. 425 (1996)
26. Elizabeth A. Joh, Breaking the Law to Enforce It: Undercover Police Participation in Crime, 62 STAN. L. REV. 155, 167 (2009);
27. Brad Heath & Kevin Johnson, Crimes by ATF and DEA Informants Not Tracked by Feds, USA TODAY (Oct. 7, 2012, 9:12 PM), http://www.usatoday.com/ story/news/2012/10/07/informants-justice-crime/1600323/.
28. Micah G. Block, Note, The Hand-Off Procedure or the New Silver Platter: How Today's Police Are Serving Up Potentially Tainted Evidence Without Even Revealing the Search that Produced It to Defendants or to Courts, 62 STAN. L. REV. 863 (2010)
29. Katharine Tinto, Undercover Policing, Overstated Culpability, 34 CARDOZO L. REV. 1401 (2013)
30. Jacinta M. Gau & Rod K. Brunson, Procedural Justice and Order Maintenance Policing: A Study of Inner-City Young Men's Perceptions of Police Legitimacy, 27 JUST. Q. 255 (2010)
31. Tom R. Tyler & Jeffrey Fagan, Legitimacy and Cooperation: Why Do People Help the Police Fight Crime in Their Communities?, 6 OHIO ST. J. CRIM. L. 231 (2008)
32. Stephen J. Schulhofer et al., American Policing at a Crossroads: Unsustainable Policies and the Procedural Justice Alternative, 101 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 335, 363 (2011)
33. Scott E. Sundby, Mapp v. Ohio's Unsung Hero: The Suppression Hearing as Morality Play, 85 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 255 (2010).
34. Wayne A. Logan, Erie and Federal Criminal Courts, 63 VAND. L. REV. 1243, 1270 (2010)
35. Jay Buckey, Note, Firearms for Felons? A Proposal to Prohibit Felons from Possessing Firearms in Vermont, 35 VT. L. REV. 957, 963-65 (2011)
36. George C. Thomas III, Judges Are Not Economists and Other Reasons to Be Skeptical of Contingent Suppression Orders: A Response to Professor Dripps, 38 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 47, 51 (2001)
37. Rachel E. Barkow, Federalism and Criminal Law: What the Feds Can Learn from the States, 109 MICH. L. REV. 519, 577 (2011)
38. The sheer number and varied forms of policing entities is testament to this fragmentation. See BRIAN A. REAVES, U.S. DEP'T OF JUSTICE, CENSUS OF STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, 2008, at 2 tbl.1 (2011), available at http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csllea08.pdf
39. GEORGE E. BERKLEY, THE DEMOCRATIC POLICEMAN 21-35 (1969)
40. John Edgar Hoover, The Basis of Sound Law Enforcement, 291 ANNALS AM. ACAD. POL. & SOC. SCI. 39, 40-42 (1954)
41. JOHN D. BREWER ET AL., THE POLICE, PUBLIC ORDER AND THE STATE 115 (2d ed. 1996)
42. Danielle Keats Citron & Frank Pasquale, Network Accountability for the Domestic Intelligence Apparatus, 62 HASTINGS L.J. 1441 (2010-2011)
43. John L. Worrall & Tomislav V. Kovandzic, Is Policing for Profit? Answers from Asset Forfeiture, 7 CRIMINOLOGY & PUB. POL'Y 219 (2008).
44. Elizabeth E. Joh, The Paradox of Private Policing, 95 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 49, 118-23 (2004)
45. Eric Bentley, Jr., Toward an International Fourth Amendment: Rethinking Searches and Seizures Abroad After Verdugo-Urquidez, 27 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 329, 376 (1994)
46. Irvin B. Nathan & Christopher D. Man, Coordinated Criminal Investigations Between the United States and Foreign Governments and Their Implications for American Constitutional Rights, 42 VA. J. INT'L L. 821, 832-36 (2002)
47. Caitlin T. Street, Note, Streaming the International Silver Platter Doctrine: Coordinating Transnational Law Enforcement in the Age of Global Terrorism and Technology, 49 COLUM. J. TRASNAT'L L. 411, 433-34 (2011)
48. Wayne A. Logan, Policing Identity, 92 B.U. L. REV. 1561, 1600-01 (2012)
49. Susan R. Klein, Independent-Norm Federalism in Criminal Law, 90 CALIF. L. REV. 1541 (2002)
50. Susan W. Brenner, Law, Dissonance, and Remote Computer Searches, 14 N.C. J. L. & TECH. 43 (2012)
51. A. Benjamin Spencer, Plausibility Pleading, 49 B.C. L. REV. 431, 481 (2008)
52. Melanie D. Wilson, An Exclusionary Rule for Police Lies, 47 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 1, 32 (2010)
53. Debra Livingston, Police Discretion and the Quality of Life in Public Places: Courts, Communities, and the New Policing, 97 COLUM. L. REV. 551, 661-62 (1997)
54. Rachel E. Barkow, Institutional Design and the Policing of Prosecutors: Lessons from Administrative Law, 61 STAN. L. REV. 869, 912 (2009);
55. Ronald F. Wright, Sentencing Commissions as Provocateurs of Prosecutorial Self-Regulation, 105 COLUM. L. REV. 1010, 1019-22 (2005).
56. Erik Luna, Rage Against the Machine: A Reply to Professors Bierschbach and Bibas, 97 MINN. L. REV. 2245, 2246-47 (2013)
57. Harry Litman & Mark D. Greenberg, Dual Prosecutions: A Model for Concurrent Federal Jurisdiction, 543 ANNALS AM. ACAD. POL. & SOC. SCI. 72, 77 (1996)
58. Ellen S. Podgor, Department of Justice Guidelines: Balancing "Discretionary Justice," 13 CORNELL J.L. & PUB. POL'Y 167, 179-80 (2004).
59. Ronald F. Wright & Wayne A. Logan, The Political Economy of Application Fees for Indigent Criminal Defense, 47 WM. & MARY L. REV. 2045, 2068 (2006)
60. William J. Stuntz, The Pathological Politics of Criminal Law, 100 MICH. L. REV. 505, 546-57 (2001)