Northeastern University Law Review
What is a “Meaningful Opportunity?” Disparities ...

BY EILIDH CURRIE

When it comes to criminal culpability, the Supreme Court has consistently treated children in a manner different than adults. Because of this understanding, the Court has recognized that sentences of life without parole may be too harsh for minors. The Court has banned mandatory juvenile life without parole (JLWOP) but permits courts to issue discretionary JLWOP sentences. The Supreme Court also permits courts to impose lengthy sentences, often called “virtual” or “de facto” life sentences. However, when issuing these lengthy sentences, courts must ensure that a minor retains a meaningful opportunity for release. Striking this balance is a challenge for sentencing courts: how long of a sentence is too long? Which sentences equate to JLWOP? What is a meaningful opportunity?…

The Bulger Complex: Common Conception of Organized Crime Leads to an Impracticable Nexus Requirement in Massachusetts Wiretap Statute

By Jess Megee

Famous tales of groups implementing violent means to further their illegal business operations have shaped the common conception of organized crime in Massachusetts. In response to this type of crime, the Massachusetts legislature enacted Massachusetts General Law ch. 272, § 99 (Section 99), which authorized police to use wiretaps to investigate organized criminal activity. Section 99 substantially relies on this common conception of organized crime, only authorizing wiretaps where criminals have committed a “designated offense” in connection with “the organized criminal trade.” This standard, however, has become impracticable in the modern criminal landscape.

The issue with Section 99’s efficacy is a direct result of the type of criminal activity prevalent in Boston. Since the fall of La Cosa Nostra and Whitey Bulger’s Winter Hill Gang, an array of highly territorial “street gangs” have dominated Boston’s underworld.” Although these entities engage in many of the same criminal operations as their more famous predecessors, they do so with less clear and defined motives. The difficulty in deciphering a clear motive renders the standard for upholding single-person consent wiretaps far too exacting to investigate gang related criminal activity. In particular, Section 99 proves inadequate as a tool to investigate gang violence, which is commonly motivated by retaliation, longstanding feuds and stature in the community, rather than any pecuniary end.

Ubiquitous Eyes Above: Should Existing Fourth Amendment Precedent Apply to Drone Surveillance?

By John E. Murray

Unmanned Aircraft Systems, commonly referred to as drones, have the potential to transform our lives, from providing package delivery to serving as hovering wi-fi beacons. Although drones are most often associated with surveillance in combat zones, civilian law enforcement agencies have not yet widely utilized drones for surveillance. The Supreme Court has held that civilian law enforcement agencies may use manned aircraft for surveillance without engaging in a “search” under the Fourth Amendment and may do so without a warrant. If this precedent were to apply to drone surveillance, civilian law enforcement agencies would effectively have carte blanche to conduct warrantless drone surveillance on citizens.