About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

61 Baylor L. Rev. 818 (2009)
The Court Says No To Incorporation Rebound: Virginia v. Moore

handle is hein.journals/baylr61 and id is 824 raw text is: THE COURT SAYS No To INCORPORATION REBOUND VIRGINIA V. MOORE Morris B. Hoffman* I. Introduction ............................................................................ 819 II. Virginia v. M oore ................................................................... 820 III. A Brief History of Incorporation ........................................... 824 IV. Incorporation Rebound .......................................................... 833 V. The Supreme Court's Limited Jurisprudence on Incorporation Rebound in a Criminal Context ....................... 838 A. The Probable Cause Core of the Search and Seizure C lau se .............................................................................. 838 B. The Supervisory Cases .................................................... 840 C. Non-Supervisory Rebound Cases Dealing with Searches Incident to Arrest ............................................. 844 VI. A Brief History of Probable Cause to Arrest, the Arrest Power and the Search Incident to Arrest ................................ 846 A. Why History Matters ....................................................... 846 B . Probable C ause ................................................................ 850 C. The Arrest Authority ....................................................... 853 D. Searches Incident to Arrest ............................................. 858 VII. Moore as a Positive Rebound Case ........................................ 862 A. Claim 1: The Slippery Slope from Positive to Negative R ebound .......................................................................... 864 B. Claim 2: The Need for Uniformity .................................. 865 * District Judge, Second Judicial District (Denver), State of Colorado; Adjunct Professor of Law, University of Colorado. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of the Second Judicial District or any of my colleagues on that Court. I thank Nestor Davidson, Martin Katz, Robert Nagel and George Thomas for their helpful comments on earlier drafts, and my former law clerk, Rachel Ollar, and two former interns, Ryan Thomas and Daniel Chapman, for their research and editorial help.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most