Alaska, the Last Frontier of Privacy: Using the State Constitution to Eliminate Pretextual Traffic Stops

The Alaska Supreme Court has consistently interpreted its state constitution to provide a greater right to privacy than the United States Supreme Court. In United States v. Whren, the United States Supreme Court upheld the practice of pretextual traffic stops, thereby permitting police officers to u...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Kaban, Jeffrey M. (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Libro
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2004
En:Año: 2004
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866127217
003 DE-627
005 20250125054900.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866127217 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866127217 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Kaban, Jeffrey M.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Alaska, the Last Frontier of Privacy: Using the State Constitution to Eliminate Pretextual Traffic Stops 
264 1 |c 2004 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The Alaska Supreme Court has consistently interpreted its state constitution to provide a greater right to privacy than the United States Supreme Court. In United States v. Whren, the United States Supreme Court upheld the practice of pretextual traffic stops, thereby permitting police officers to use traffic violations as a pretext to investigate crime in the absence of probable cause. However, the Alaska Supreme Courts has issued no clear ruling as to whether state case law finding pretextual stops unconstitutional remains controlling. As a result of Alaska's failure to directly address this issue, the state's lower courts are divided as to whether to apply Whren's objective standard or current state case law's subjective standard to determine whether a stop is pretextual. This Note, which examines the concurrent development of legal rulings on pretextual traffic stops in Alaskan and the United States Supreme Court, focuses on Alaska state constitutional jurisprudence. More specifically, it explores Alaska search and seizure and vehicular stop jurisprudence to demonstrate the greater expectation of vehicular privacy that Alaska affords citizens. Lastly, this Note argues that Alaska should adopt a two-part test involving subjective and objective elements to determine whether a stop is pretextual 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/230145886.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391807971 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866127217 
LOK |0 005 20231018043640 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE68256867 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw