CONSERVATIVE COURT SAYS "GOODBYE TO ALL THAT" AND FORGES A NEW ORDER IN THE LAW OF SEIZURE--CALIFORNIA V. HODARI D.

• NCJ Number: 145368
• Journal: Louisiana Law Review Volume: 52 Issue: 5 Dated: (May 1992) Pages: 1321-1355
• Author(s): R A Piedrahita
• Date Published: 1992
• Length: 35 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The US Supreme Court's decision in California v. Hodari D. represents a conservative, law-and-order-emphasizing society's tendency to disregard the fourth amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Abstract

A juvenile defendant had, upon being chased by police, thrown down a bag later found to contain cocaine. He claimed that there had been no constitutional basis for the chase, and therefore moved to suppress the evidence. The move was denied by the juvenile court, then granted by the California Court of Appeal. The US Supreme Court reversed that decision. The author argues that the Supreme Court's decision was unjust, the crucial factor being that the chase preceded the reason for the chase and not the other way around. Constitutionally, citizens have the right not to consent to seizure; in reality, they usually regard themselves as "seized" when confronted by police. Initial police action is not inconsequential and must meet the requirements of the fourth amendment. 164 footnotes