Jump to Navigation
George Mason Law Review
Volume 15 June 2008 Number 4

WRITE-ON CASE TOPIC: United States v. Weikert, 504 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2007).

2008 Write-On Instructions


PRINCIPAL SOURCES

United States v. Weikert, 504 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2007).

U.S. CONST. amend. IV.

United States v. Amerson, 483 F.3d 73 (2d Cir. 2007).

Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (2006).

United States v. Kincade, 379 F.3d 813 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (Only the concurring and dissenting opinions of this case are attached. Students may only read and cite to the concurrence and dissents).


SECONDARY SOURCES

Julie Rikelman, Justifying Forcible DNA Testing Schemes Under the Special Needs Exception to the Fourth Amendment: A Dangerous Precedent, 59 BAYLOR L. REV. 41 (2007). (The relevant portions of this article (Parts V.A, V.B, and V.D) are attached. Students may only read and cite to those parts.)

Robert Cacace, Samson v. California: Tearing Down a Pillar of Fourth Amendment Protections, 42 HARV. C.R.-C.L. L. REV. 223 (2007). (The relevant portions of this article (Parts IV and V) are attached. Students may only read and cite to those parts.)

Joy Huang, United States v. Kincade: Constitutionality of Mandatory DNA Testing, 31 HASTINGS CONST. L.Q. 587 (2005). (The relevant portions of this article (Parts VII.A and VII.B) are attached. Students may only read and cite to those parts.)

79 C.J.S. Searches § 60 (2008).