United Sates v. Miller case brief

United Sates v. Miller case brief summary

Facts:

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. 

Analysis:

•This is NOT a 4^th amendment issue. 

•Not changed by the bank secrecy acourt

4^th amendment rights are PERSONAL rights. 

the court is saying the records are the bank’s records and not Miller’s records.

3^rd person doctrine: When Miller conveyed his information and checks to the bank, he lost his personal 4^th 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.

DISSENT 

Allowing government to access our papers is scary 

Katz analysis: the 4^th amendment doesn’t prevent a 3^rd 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!