Return to Syllabus
Problem and Assignment
In
June of 2005 ten retail stores on Main Street in Metro City in the
State of Blackacre are broken into during the night and valuable
merchandise is taken from each store. In response to this crime wave,
police patrols on Main Street are increased. In addition, a large
unmarked police truck containing a full-body backscatter x-ray unit
is parked on Main Street. The police officers patrolling the area at
night are instructed to stop persons who are acting in a suspicious
fashion and make such people pass through the full-body x-ray machine
so that the police officers can determine whether the persons they
have stopped are carrying concealed burglary tools or other materials
that could be used to break into a store or haul away loot.
At
1:30 a.m. on July 4, 2005, Police Officer Mary Tyler, who has been
assigned to patrol Main Street, observes Jane Katz walking slowly
down Main Street. Officer Tyler observes that Katz is walking slowly
on the sidewalk, stopping at each store, and peering into the display
window of each store for two to three minutes before moving on to the
next store. This happens five to six times. Officer Mary Tyler then
stops Jane Katz, takes her to the nearby police truck with the
scanner, and instructs Katz to walk into the scanner unit and stand
in it until told to come out. Katz complies with Tyler's
instructions. The scanner produces the following image:
Officer Tyler points to the image and asks Katz what the devices on
the left-hand side of her waist are. Katz replies that the device on
her extreme left is a small cell phone and that the device closer to
the center of her body is an electronic diary, which, Katz states,
she actually uses as a personal diary. Officer Tyler then reaches
under Katz's clothing and removes the electronic diary. She activates
the device and she reads the following entry, which is time-stamped
July 3, 2005, 11:48 p.m., "I'm bored. I'm depressed I feel poor.
I think I'll check out some stores on Main Street. They probably have
stuff that will cheer me up."
The
State of Blackacre later prosecutes Jane Katz for attempted burglary,
a felony. At Katz's trial the prosecutor offers the electronic diary
entry (quoted above) in evidence. Defense counsel objects on various
grounds. Among those grounds is that the admission of the diary entry
violates defendant's federal constitutional rights. However, defense
counsel's objection is overruled and the electronic diary entry is
admitted in evidence, Katz is convicted, Katz appeals her conviction,
and her case eventually finds its way to the Supreme Court of the
United States.
The
issue before the Supreme Court is the constitutionality or
unconstitutionality of Blackacre's use of the electronic diary entry
as evidence in Katz's criminal trial. Although it is now 2011, assume
that Justice William O. Douglas, Justice Black, and Justice Harlan are still alive.
Furthermore, assume that the Supreme Court has decided the cases it
decided through the year 1968, including Duncan v. Louisiana (1968); Katz v. United States (1967); Griswold v. Connecticut (1965); Mapp v. Ohio (1961); and Olmstead v. United States (1928). However, assume that no
cases decided after 1968 have been decided.
On
February 2, two to three of you will assume the position of Justice
Douglas and you will together discuss the constitutionality or
unconstitutionality of the use of the electronic diary entry at
Katz's trial. The rest of you will challenge
every step of Justice Douglas's analysis and argument.
Two to
three of you will will assume the position of Justice Hugo Black and
you will together discuss the constitutionality or
unconstitutionality of the use of the electronic diary entry at
Katz's trial. The rest of you will challenge
every step of Justice Black's analysis and argument.
Two to
three of you will will assume the position of Justice Harlan and
you will together discuss the constitutionality or
unconstitutionality of the use of the electronic diary entry at
Katz's trial. The rest of you will challenge
every step of Justice Harlan's analysis and argument.
Return to Syllabus