Abstract
This Note contends that the Court's decision to adopt the Houghton approach to the automobile warrant exception is problematic for three reasons. First, the Court has erroneously interpreted the historical evidence behind the creation of the Fourth Amendment. Second, the Court, by chipping away at stare decisis, is disrupting the foundations of American jurisprudence and the development of the law. Third, by creating a new lexicon, changing the meanings of the words, the Court is trying to define away the protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment. This Note will briefly summarize the facts of Houghton and review the historical purpose for the creation of the Fourth Amendment and then summarize the Court's opinion and the dissenting opinion. Finally, this note will analyze the significance of this "newly minted" test.
Recommended Citation
Rachel Gader-Shafran,
Crimes and Errors Impossible to Commit: Defining Away the Fourth Amendment - Wyoming v. Houghton,
47 Clev. St. L. Rev.
575
(1999)
available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol47/iss4/8