James Durling


Imagine that you commit a crime in Connecticut and then return home to
Puerto Rico where you commit another crime. In the course of investigating the
second crime (in Puerto Rico), the FBI discovers evidence that implicates you in
the first crime. In light of this evidence, the federal government indicts you for
the first crime, in accordance with venue rules, in the District of Connecticut. At
trial, you argue that the inculpatory evidence should be suppressed because the
Second Circuit (the place of the trial) has ruled that similar searches violate the
Fourth Amendment. The government, by contrast, argues that the evidence
should be admitted because the First Circuit (the place of the search) has ruled
that such searches do not violate the Fourth Amendment. How should the trial
judge rule?1