NCJ Number
16073
Journal
American Criminal Law Review Volume: 11 Issue: 4 Dated: (SUMMER 1973) Pages: 1087-1102
Date Published
1973
Length
16 pages
Annotation
CONSIDERS THAT THE DIONISIO DECISION CONSTITUTES REMOVING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT SHIELD AGAINST GRAND JURY POWER AND SHIFTS GRAND JURY ABUSE FROM TERMS OF PRIVACY TO TERMS OF HARASSMENT.
Abstract
IT IS CONSIDERED THAT THE DIONISIO RULING HOLDS THAT A GRAND JURY SUBPOENA IS NOT A SEIZURE UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT. THE AUTHOR BELIEVES THE SUPREME COURT HAS BROADENED GRAND JURY PROCESS WITHOUT IMPOSING NEEDED CHECKS ON THE EXERCISE OF THAT POWER. IN PERMITTING THE SECURING OF A VOICE EXEMPLAR THROUGH SUBPOENA, IT IS DEEMED THAT THE COURT MAKES NO PRIVACY DISTINCTION BETWEEN BODY EVIDENCE WHICH CAN BE SEEN WITHOUT THE COOPERATION OF THE SUBJECT AND BODY EVIDENCE THAT REQUIRES THE COOPERATION OF THE SUBJECT FOR PRODUCTION.