Sunday, January 13, 2019

United Sates v. Miller case brief

United Sates v. Miller case brief summary

iller was involved in an illegal whiskey business with the intent to defraud the government of tax revenue.
•The government subpoenaed documents from the bank they used to prosecute him. Miller is saying he has a reasonable expectation to privacy for the Papers.
Supreme Court says they assumed the risk the government would look into their papers when putting them into a bank. 

•This is NOT a 4th amendment issue. 
•Not changed by the bank secrecy acourt
4th amendment rights are PERSONAL rights. 
the court is saying the records are the bank’s records and not Miller’s records.
3rd person doctrine: When Miller conveyed his information and checks to the bank, he lost his personal 4th amendment rights to privacy.
He assumed the risk when he gave his information to the bank.
When you convey information to a third party it is NOT A SEARCH.

Allowing government to access our papers is scary 
Katz analysis: the 4th amendment doesn’t prevent a 3rd party from revealing the information.
The bank was the one who voluntarily relayed the info.

Similar to informant wearing the recording devise. 

Check out our eBook: How to Win at Law School to see how to transfer to a top school, get the top grades in your class, and get a head start on the legal profession!

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Evolution of Legal Marketing: From Billboards to Digital Leads Over the last couple of decades, the face of legal marketing has changed a l...