Present: Ireland, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Gants, Duffly, & Lenk, JJ. Zachary Hillman, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. Brian J. Anderson for the defendant. The following submitted briefs for amici curiae: William W. Adams for Ardil Innis. Donald Bronstein, Committee for Public Counsel Services, Joshua Levy, Matthew Mazzotta, & Matthew R. Segal, for American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts & another. Michael D. Cutler & Steven S. Epstein for National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Law.
The defendant's vehicle was searched at a sobriety checkpoint on June 11, 2010, after a State police trooper smelled the odor of unburnt marijuana emanating from it. The search revealed both loose marijuana and plastic baggies containing marijuana residue, in addition to three “Ecstasy” pills (methylenedioxy methamphetamine) and several rounds of ammunition. The search was based on the odor of marijuana alone; the defendant exhibited no signs of impairment and, although issued a summons for criminal offenses, was permitted to drive away without being asked to submit to any field sobriety tests. Approximately two months later, however, a criminal complaint issued charging the defendant with various drug- and firearms-related offenses.
A judge of the Boston Municipal Court initially denied the defendant's motion to suppress the fruits of the search, namely, the marijuana, Ecstasy pills, and ammunition. Several months later, in light of Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459 (2011), the judge reconsidered her ruling and allowed the motion to suppress. A single justice of this court subsequently allowed the Commonwealth's application for leave to pursue an interlocutory appeal in the Appeals Court, and we transferred the case to this court on our own motion.
The Commonwealth maintains that the search was justified on three different grounds. First, it was lawful because the search was conducted incident to the defendant's arrest. Second, the search was permissible because it was to prevent the defendant from smoking marijuana while driving. And, third, the search was lawful because it fell under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, insofar as there was probable cause to believe that the defendant's vehicle contained evidence of a Federal crime. Considering this case in conjunction with our decision in Commonwealth v. Overmyer, ante, (2014), we reject these contentions and affirm the judge's order allowing the motion to suppress.
1. Background. We summarize the facts found by the judge after an evidentiary hearing, supplemented by uncontested facts in the record. See Commonwealth v. Isaiah I., 448 Mass. 334, 337 (2007), S.C., 450 Mass. 818 (2008). The only witness at that hearing was the State police trooper who conducted the search at the sobriety checkpoint. “In reviewing a ruling on a motion to suppress, we accept the judge's subsidiary findings of fact absent clear error ‘but conduct an independent review of [her] ultimate findings and conclusions of law.’ “ Commonwealth v. Scott, 440 Mass. 642, 646 (2004), quoting Commonwealth v. Jimenez, 438 Mass. 213, 218 (2002).
In the early morning hours of June 11, 2010, State police were conducting a sobriety checkpoint2 on Gallivan Boulevard in the Dorchester section of Boston. The testifying trooper was responsible for stopping every passing vehicle to determine whether the driver was operating it while under the influence of alcohol. One of the vehicles stopped was driven by the defendant. After the trooper identified himself, the defendant rolled down the driver's side window to speak with him, at which point the trooper smelled a strong odor of unburnt marijuana emanating from the vehicle.
The trooper then performed a search of the vehicle, which uncovered, in the door on the driver's side, a device commonly used for grinding marijuana; three blue pills, later identified as Ecstasy; “some marijuana” in the center console; and, in the passenger compartment, plastic baggies which appeared to contain burnt marijuana residue. The trooper also searched the trunk, where he found rounds of .38 caliber ammunition.
At the conclusion of the search, the trooper did not arrest the vehicle's occupants, but rather issued summonses for criminal offenses and released them. A complaint subsequently issued against the defendant, charging him with illegal possession of ammunition, in violation of G.L. c. 269, § 10 (h ) (1); possession of a class D substance with the intent to distribute, in violation of G.L. c. 94C, § 32C (a ); and possession of a class B substance, in violation of G.L. c. 94C, § 34.
The judge determined that, based on his experience, the trooper was qualified to recognize the odor of marijuana.5 See Commonwealth v. Garden, 451 Mass. 43, 48–49 (2008). The judge went on to rule that, because the passage of the 2008 initiative did “not change the probable cause analysis,” the scent of marijuana still provided “probable cause to believe that marijuana is nearby.” Although the judge found that there was no basis to believe that more than one ounce of marijuana was present in the vehicle, she nevertheless concluded that the warrantless search was justified under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. The odor of unburnt marijuana provided the basis for the search; although the odor did not suggest the presence of a particular quantity of marijuana, it did indicate the presence of some marijuana, which, the judge stated, was still unlawful contraband after the 2008 initiative. Therefore, the judge initially denied the defendant's motion to suppress.
The judge's initial ruling, however, predated our decision in Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459, 472, 475–476 (2011), in which we held that, in view of the decriminalization of marijuana occasioned by the 2008 initiative, “the odor of burnt marijuana alone cannot reasonably provide suspicion of criminal activity,” nor can it give rise to probable cause to search a vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. After the release of this court's decision in that case, the defendant moved for reconsideration of the judge's ruling on his motion to suppress. The judge allowed the motion for reconsideration and thereafter reversed her initial ruling.
2. Discussion. “Warrantless searches are presumptively unreasonable, under both the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights.” Commonwealth v. Gouse, 461 Mass. 787, 792 (2012). “When a search is conducted without a warrant, the burden is on the Commonwealth to show that the search ‘falls within a narrow class of permissible exceptions' to the warrant requirement.” Commonwealth v. Perkins, 465 Mass. 600, 603 (2013), quoting Commonwealth v. Antobenedetto, 366 Mass. 51, 57 (1974).
A search incident to arrest, as the name suggests, may be effected without a warrant when an arrest has taken place, in order to “remove any weapons that the [arrestee] might seek to use in order to resist arrest or effect his escape” or “to search for and seize any evidence on the arrestee's person in order to prevent its concealment or destruction.” Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 762–763 (1969). See Commonwealth v. Santiago, 410 Mass. 737, 743 (1991). Although a search may precede a formal arrest, see id. at 742, quoting Commonwealth v. Brillante, 399 Mass. 152, 154 n. 5 (1987), the search and the arrest “must be roughly contemporaneous.” Commonwealth v. Washington, 449 Mass. 476, 481 (2007).
Where no arrest is underway, the rationales underlying the exception do not apply with equal force. Indeed, “[t]o permit a search incident to arrest where the suspect is not arrested until much later, or is never arrested, would sever this exception completely from its justifications” and effectively “create a wholly new exception for a ‘search incident to probable cause to arrest.’ “ Commonwealth v. Washington, supra at 482, citing Commonwealth v. Alvarado, 420 Mass. 542, 554 (1995). See Commonwealth v. Skea, 18 Mass.App.Ct. 685, 690 (1984), and cases cited (“Detentions for frisking, questioning, routine traffic stops, and the like, where the detainee is released after the police business is transacted, are treated as “ ‘seizures” of the person,’ subject to Fourth Amendment scrutiny ․, but are differentiated from ‘formal,’ or ‘custodial,’ arrests, the custodial aspect of which serves as the theoretical justification for the incident search” [citations omitted] ). Given that it lacked the critical element of an arrest, the search of the defendant's vehicle cannot be sustained as a search incident to arrest.
In any event, the testimony at the motion hearing would not have supported a finding of probable cause to arrest the defendant for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of marijuana.8 There was no evidence that the defendant bore any of the classic indicia of impairment, nor did the trooper administer a field sobriety test in order to gauge the defendant's level of impairment, notwithstanding the fact that the vehicle had been stopped at a sobriety checkpoint. Cf. Commonwealth v. Daniel, 464 Mass. 746, 756–757 (2013) (“[T]he Commonwealth elicited no testimony that [the defendant] showed any signs of impairment during [her] encounter [with police]. The officer did not testify that [the defendant's] eyes were red or glassy, that her speech or movements were unusual, or that her responses to questioning were inappropriate or uncooperative. He did not perform any tests to assess [the defendant's] physical and mental acuity” [footnote omitted] ).
Therefore, because the defendant was not arrested, and because the trooper lacked probable cause to arrest him for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of marijuana, the search of the defendant's vehicle was not justified as a search incident to arrest.
b. Search in order to prevent defendant from smoking marijuana while driving. The Commonwealth contends that the trooper was “duty-bound” to search the defendant's vehicle to ensure that he would not “smoke additional marijuana while driving.” In this argument, the Commonwealth does not attempt to fit the search within the parameters of the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, nor could it; the Commonwealth argues only that the odor of unburnt marijuana and the presence of a small amount of marijuana in the glove compartment suggested that “there could have been more.” The mere possibility that more marijuana was present in the vehicle does not amount to probable cause to believe that the defendant had committed, or was committing, a crime, namely possession of more than one ounce of marijuana. See Commonwealth v. Johnson, 461 Mass. 44, 49 & n. 6 (2011), citing Commonwealth v.. Antobenedetto, 366 Mass. 51, 53 (1974) (automobile exception to warrant requirement permits search of vehicle where probable cause supports search). See also Commonwealth v. Daniel, supra at 751–752 (defendant's surrender of two small bags of marijuana did not give rise to probable cause to search vehicle).
Instead, the Commonwealth maintains only that effectuating a warrantless search of the vehicle was the appropriate resolution of the choice facing the trooper, between searching the defendant's vehicle or releasing him, with the possibility that he could smoke additional marijuana while driving. But, notwithstanding this novel argument, there is no “Hobson's choice” exception to the warrant requirement; that operating while under the influence may be an “epidemic,” as the Commonwealth argues, does not legitimate otherwise unconstitutional searches.
Moreover, there is no evidence that the defendant would have smoked marijuana while driving had the trooper refrained from searching his vehicle. The trooper was adamant that it was unburnt, rather than burnt, marijuana that he smelled, suggesting that, prior to the stop, the defendant had not been smoking while driving. Similarly, as discussed supra, there is no evidence that the defendant was impaired; the trooper performed no tests to assess his physical and mental acuity and permitted him to drive away.
We are not persuaded by the Commonwealth's suggestion that the search was permissible owing to the trooper's duty to ensure the safety of the roadways and to prevent the mere potential that the defendant could smoke marijuana while driving. Were we to conclude otherwise, it would follow necessarily that police could search any vehicle containing sealed bottles of alcohol, based on a potential risk that the driver could open a bottle and begin drinking while driving.
c. Search pursuant to automobile exception, based on probable cause to believe that defendant had violated Federal law. As a third possible justification for the search, the Commonwealth suggests the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, which provides that police may search an automobile where they have probable cause to believe that evidence of a crime will be found therein. See Commonwealth v. Johnson, supra at 49 & n. 6, citing Commonwealth v. Antobenedetto, supra at 53. According to this theory, the search conformed to the requirements of the automobile exception because the trooper had probable cause to believe that evidence of a Federal crime, namely, possession of marijuana, would be found inside the defendant's vehicle, despite the absence of any Federal involvement in the stop at issue. This argument effectively asks us to circumvent the “clear intent” of the voters who enacted the 2008 initiative, which we identified in Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459, 464–465, 472 (2011), and to overrule the holding of that case. We decline to do so.
We observe at the outset that State and local law enforcement authorities are the creatures of statute, which may be modified by the Legislature. See Commonwealth v. Dugan, 12 Met. 233, 234 (1847) (“The office of a police officer is not one known to the common law; it is created by statute, and must be regulated and administered according to the statute”). It follows that duly enacted laws may circumscribe police authority to act. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Landry, 438 Mass. 206, 211 (2002) (in light of statute providing that it “shall not be a crime” to participate in hypodermic needle exchange program, police officer may not lawfully arrest individual bearing program membership card for violating provision regarding unlawful possession of needles). Thus, the 2008 initiative, constituting as it does a valid exercise of legislative authority, limited the scope of permissible police conduct with regard to marijuana offenses by reclassifying possession of one ounce or less as a civil violation. See Commonwealth v. Cruz, supra at 471–472 (“the entire statutory scheme [enacted by the 2008 initiative] also implicates police conduct in the field”).
Similarly, although the “general rule is that local police are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes,” Gonzales v. Peoria, 722 F.2d 468, 474 (9th Cir.1983), overruled on other grounds by Hodgers–Durgin v. de la Vina, 199 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir.1999), their authority to do so derives from State law. See Miller v. United States, 357 U.S. 301, 305 (1958) (where State police officers make arrest for violation of Federal law, “lawfulness of the arrest without warrant is to be determined by reference to state law”); Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 15 n. 5 (1948) (same); Goulis v. State Judge of the Third Dist. Court of E. Middlesex, 246 Mass. 1, 5–6 (1923), quoting Dallemagne v. Moisan, 197 U.S. 169, 174 (1905) (“It has long been held that power may be conferred upon a state officer, as such, to execute a duty imposed under an act of Congress, and the officer may execute the same, unless its execution is prohibited by the constitution or legislation of the state”). While State law may authorize local and State police to enforce Federal criminal statutes,10 it need not do so.
Where the 2008 initiative decriminalized possession of one ounce or less of marijuana under State law, and accordingly removed police authority to arrest individuals for civil violations, see G.L. c. 94C, § 32N, it also must be read as curtailing police authority to enforce the Federal prohibition of possession of small amounts of marijuana. Any contrary interpretation would clearly contravene the people's intent, to which we must give effect. See Commonwealth v. Cruz, supra at 470–471. Construing the statutory scheme to continue to permit State and local police to enforce the Federal prohibition would be entirely inconsistent with the objective that we discerned in Commonwealth v. Cruz, supra at 477, to “free up the police for more serious criminal pursuits.” We will not adopt an interpretation that is so plainly at odds with the purpose of the initiative. See Bridgewater State Univ. Found. v. Assessors of Bridgewater, 463 Mass. 154, 160 (2012) (court will not embrace “absurd or unreasonable” interpretation of statute).
The Commonwealth appears to acknowledge that, after the 2008 initiative, State and local police lack authority to make arrests under Federal law for possessing small amounts of marijuana, but claims nonetheless that police may simply investigate possible violations of Federal statutes and turn over any evidence obtained to Federal authorities. Even assuming that the power to investigate crimes and make arrests may be decoupled in such a way, the Federal government's current stance on prosecuting marijuana-related offenses significantly undercuts the strength of this argument. In 2009, and again in 2013, the United States Department of Justice issued a memorandum to all United States Attorneys outlining its enforcement priorities with respect to marijuana-related offenses. See J.M. Cole, Deputy Attorney General of the United States, Guidance Regarding Marijuana Enforcement (Aug. 29, 2013) (Cole); D.W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General of the United States, Investigations and Prosecutions in States Authorizing the Medical Use of Marijuana (Oct. 19, 2009). Such priorities include, inter alia, “[p]reventing revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels” and “[p]reventing violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana.” Cole, supra at 1–2.
The Department of Justice has recognized that, “[o]utside of these enforcement priorities, the federal government has traditionally relied on states and local enforcement agencies to address marijuana activity through enforcement of their own narcotics laws,” and will continue to do so where Federal priorities are not implicated. Id. at 2–3. Therefore, given the clear preference expressed in the 2008 initiative that police focus their attention elsewhere, Federal law does not supply an alternative basis for investigating possession of one ounce or less of marijuana, especially where the Federal government has signaled a lessened interest in prosecuting such conduct.
To be sure, examples of cooperation between Federal and State law enforcement authorities are legion in our case law. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Gonzalez, 426 Mass. 313, 314 (1997); Commonwealth v. Cast, 407 Mass. 891, 893 (1990). See also United States v. Franklin, 630 F.3d 53, 54 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 131 S.Ct. 2466 (2011). By concluding as we do, we do not intend to call into question the legitimacy of such joint efforts. We hold only that where, as here, State law expressly has decriminalized certain conduct, there is no extant joint investigation, and the Federal government has indicated that it will not prosecute certain conduct, the fact that such conduct is technically subject to a Federal prohibition does not provide an independent justification for a warrantless search.
Therefore, “[a]bsent articulable facts supporting a belief that either occupant of the vehicle possessed a criminal amount of marijuana [under State law], the search was not justified by the need to search for contraband [under Federal law].” Commonwealth v. Daniel, 464 Mass. 746, 752 (2013).
1. We acknowledge the amicus briefs submitted on behalf of the defendant by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and the Committee for Public Counsel Services; the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Law; and Ardil Innis.
2. In order to pass constitutional muster, “the selection of motor vehicles to be stopped [at a sobriety checkpoint] must not be arbitrary, safety must be assured, motorists' inconvenience must be minimized and assurance must be given that the procedure is being conducted pursuant to a plan devised by law enforcement supervisory personnel.” Commonwealth v. McGeoghegan, 389 Mass. 137, 143 (1983). See Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 663 (1979). No evidence was adduced at the hearing concerning the existence of a protocol governing the sobriety checkpoint in question, or whether any such protocol addressed the use of marijuana as well as alcohol. In any event, however, the defendant did not challenge the legality of the sobriety checkpoint below or on appeal. We assume for the sake of discussion that the checkpoint met constitutional requirements, and deem any arguments to the contrary waived. See, e .g., Carey v. New England Organ Bank, 446 Mass. 270, 285 (2006) (issues not raised or argued below waived on appeal).
3. The trooper did not testify whether he believed that the bag contained more or less than one ounce of marijuana, and no other evidence as to the weight of the marijuana was before the judge.
4. No evidence was seized as a result of this pat frisk.
5. The trooper testified that, over his five years of service for the State police, he encountered marijuana “on a very regular basis,” and had made approximately twenty or twenty-five arrests related to marijuana. He also testified that, since 2008, he had issued between twenty and thirty civil citations for possession of marijuana.
6. We focus primarily on the lawfulness of the search of the defendant's vehicle, rather than the exit order, because it was the search that yielded the evidence sought to be suppressed. However, because, as the judge found, the basis for the search was the odor of unburnt marijuana, and there was no other reason to believe that a criminal amount of marijuana was present in the vehicle, there was no reasonable suspicion of criminal activity warranting an exit order. See Commonwealth v. Overmyer, ante, (2014); Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459, 472 (2011). The other permissible grounds for an exit order similarly were absent: there was no indication that the trooper's safety was threatened, nor, as shall be discussed infra, was the exit order justified “to facilitate an independently permissible warrantless search of the car under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement.” See Commonwealth v. Cruz, supra at 467.
7. Nor, for that matter, was the defendant subsequently cited for or charged with operating his vehicle while under the influence.
8. The 2008 initiative explicitly did not alter statutes relating to operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of marijuana. See G.L. c. 94C, § 32L; Commonwealth v. Daniel, 464 Mass. 746, 754 (2013).
9. The Commonwealth conceded at oral argument that evidence that the defendant was operating while under the influence of marijuana was “scant.” The Commonwealth instead pursued the novel claim that the State trooper was justified in searching the vehicle where the defendant handed over a small amount of marijuana in what the Commonwealth argued was an attempt to “divert” the trooper's attention from the presence of other criminal contraband in the vehicle. That the defendant intended to distract the trooper by using the small amount of marijuana in the glove compartment as a decoy is not supported by the findings of the judge, and we decline to address such a “diversion” theory on appeal.
10. Of course, State law may authorize local enforcement of Federal statutes only if not preempted by Federal law. See Arizona v. United States, 132 S.Ct. 2492, 2505–2507 (2012).


text:
Zerefos, C., J. Kapsomenakis, K. Eleftheratos, K. Tourpali, I. Petropavlovskikh, D. Hubert, S. Godin-Beekmann, W. Steinbrecht, S. Frith, V. Sofieva, B. Hassler, “Representativeness of single lidar stations for zonally averaged ozone profiles, their trends and attribution to proxies”, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18(9), 6427-6440, 2018.
Raptis, P.-I., Kazadzis, S., Eleftheratos, K., Amiridis, V., and Fountoulakis, I.: Single scattering Albedo’s spectral dependence effect on UV irradiance, Atmosphere, 9, 364; doi:10.3390/atmos9090364, 2018.
Gierens, K., Eleftheratos, K., and Sausen, R.: Intercalibration between HIRS/2 and HIRS/3 channel 12 based on physical considerations, Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 11, 939-948, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-939-2018, 2018.
Fountoulakis, I., C.S. Zerefos, A.F. Bais, J. Kapsomenakis, M.E. Koukouli, N. Ohkawara, V. Fioletov, H. De Backer, K. Lakkala8, T. Karppinen, A.R. Webb, “25 years of spectral UV-B measurements over Canada, Europe and Japan: trends and effects from 1 changes in ozone, aerosols, clouds and surface reflectivity”, C. R. Geoscience, 350, 393-402, 2018.
Voloudakis, D., A. Karamanos, G. Economou, J. Kapsomenakis, C. Zerefos “A comparative estimate of climate change impacts on cotton and maize in Greece”, Journal of Water and Climate Change, 9 (4), 643-656, 2018.
Zerefos, C. S., K. Eleftheratos, J. Kapsomenakis, S. Solomos, A. Inness, D. Balis, A. Redondas, H. Eskes, M. Allaart, V. Amiridis, A. Dahlback, V. De Bock, H. Diémoz, R. Engelmann, P. Eriksen, V. Fioletov, J. Gröbner, A. Heikkilä, I. Petropavlovskikh, J. Jarosławski, W. Josefsson, T. Karppinen, U. Köhler, C. Meleti, C. Repapis, J. Rimmer, V. Savinykh, V. Shirotov, A. M. Siani, A. R. D. Smedley, M. Stanek, and R. Stübi, Detecting volcanic sulfur dioxide plumes in the Northern Hemisphere using the Brewer spectrophotometer, other networks, and satellite observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 551–574, doi: 10.5194/acp-17-551-2017, 2017.
Zerefos, C. S., J. Kapsomenakis, K. Eleftheratos, K. Tourpali, I. Petropavlovskikh, D. Hubert, S. Godin-Beekmann, W. Steinbrecht, S. Frith, V. Sofieva, and B. Hassler, Representativeness of single lidar stations for zonally averaged ozone profiles, their trends and attribution to proxies, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2017-1040, 2017.
Kalabokas, P., Hjorth, J., Foret, G., Dufour, G., Eremenko, M., Siour, G., Cuesta, J., and Beekmann, M.: An investigation on the origin of regional springtime ozone episodes in the western Mediterranean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 3905-3928, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-3905-2017, 2017.
Gierens, K., and K. Eleftheratos, Technical note: On the intercalibration of HIRS channel 12 brightness temperatures following the transition from HIRS 2 to HIRS 3/4 for ice saturation studies, Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 10, 681-693, doi: 10.5194/amt-10-681-2017, 2017.
Gierens, K., K. Eleftheratos, and R. Sausen, Intercalibration between HIRS/2 and HIRS/3 channel 12 based on physical considerations, Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., doi:10.5194/amt-2017-119, 2017.
Gierens, K., and K. Eleftheratos, Improvements to the HIRS channel 12 intercalibration for ice supersaturation studies, GSICS Quarterly Newsletter: Spring Issue, Vol. 11, No. 1, 6-7, doi:10.7289/V5BK19F0, 2017.
Zerefos, C. S., K. Eleftheratos, J. Kapsomenakis, S. Solomos, A. Inness, D. Balis, A. Redondas, H. Eskes, V. Amiridis, C. Repapis, M. Allaart, R. Engelmann, A. Dahlback, V. De Bock, H. Diémoz, P. Eriksen, J. Gröbner, A. Heikkilä, J. Jarosławski, W. Josefsson, T. Karppinen, U. Köhler, C. Meleti, C. Repapis, J. Rimmer, V. Savinykh, V. Shirotov, A. M. Siani, A. R. D. Smedley, M. Stanek, and R. Stübi, “Detecting volcanic sulfur dioxide plumes in the Northern Hemisphere using the Brewer spectrophotometer, other networks, and satellite observations”, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions, doi:10.5194/acp-2016-500, 2016.
Diémoz, H., K. Eleftheratos, S. Kazadzis, V. Amiridis, and C. S. Zerefos, “Retrieval of aerosol optical depth in the visible range with a Brewer spectrophotometer in Athens”, Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 9, 1871-1888, doi:10.5194/amt-9-1871-2016, 2016.
Hassinen, S., D. Balis, H. Bauer, M. Begoin, A. Delcloo, K. Eleftheratos, S. Gimeno Garcia, J. Granville, M. Grossi, N. Hao, P. Hedelt, F. Hendrick, M. Hess, K.-P. Heue, J. Hovila, H. Helge Jønch-Sørensen, N. Kalakoski, M. Koukouli, J. Kujanpää, J.-C. Lambert, C. Lerot, D. Loyola, A. Määttä, G. Pinardi, F. Romahn, M. van Roozendael, R. Lutz, I. De Smedt, P. Stammes, W. Steinbrecht, J. Tamminen, N. Theys, L. G. Tilstra, O. N. E. Tuinder, P. Valks, C. Zerefos, W. Zimmer, and E. Zyrichidou “Overview of the O3M SAF GOME-2 operational atmospheric composition and UV radiation data products and data availability”, Atmos. Meas. Techn., 9, 383-407, 2016.
Kalabokas, P., J. Hjorth, G. Foret, G. Dufour, M. Eremenko, G. Siour, J. Cuesta, M. Beekmann, “An investigation on the origin of regional spring time ozone episodes in the Western Mediterranean and Central Europe”, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., doi:10.5194/acp-2016-615, 2016.
Philandras, C.M., P.T. Nastos, I.N. Kapsomenakis, C.C. Repapis “Climatology of upper air temperature in the Eastern Mediterranean region”, Atmos. Research, 152, 29-42, 2015.
Wagner, A., A.M. Blechschmidt, I. Bouarar, E.G. Brunke, C. Lerbaux, M. Cupeiro, P. Cristofanelli, H. Eskes, J. Flemming, H. Flentje, M. George, S. Gilge, A. Hilboll, A. Inness, J. Kapsomenakis, A. Richter, L. Ries, W. Spangl, O. Stein, R. Weller, C. Zerefos “Evaluation of the MACC operational forecast system potential and challenges of global near-real-time modelling with respect to reactive gases in the troposphere”, ACP, 14005-14030, http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/15/14005/2015/, doi: 10.5194/acp-15-14005-2015.
Eleftheratos, K., S. Kazadzis, C. S. Zerefos, K. Tourpali, C. Meleti, D. Balis, I. Zyrichidou, K. Lakkala, U. Feister, T. Koskela, A. Heikkil?, J. M. Karhu, "Ozone and spectroradiometric UV changes in the past 20 years over middle and high latitudes", Atmosphere-Ocean, doi: 10,1080/07055900.2014.919897, 2014.
Isaksen, I. S. A., T. K. Berntsen, S. B. Dals?ren, K. Eleftheratos, Y. Orsolini, B. Rognerud, F. Stordal, O. A. S?vde, C. Zerefos, C. D. Holmes, "Atmospheric Ozone and Methane in a Changing Climate", Atmosphere, 5, 518-535; doi:10.3390/atmos5030518, 2014.
Kleanthous S., Vrekoussis M., Mihalopoulos N., Kalabokas P. and Lelieveld J., "On the temporal and spatial variation of ozone in Cyprus". Science of Tot. Environ. 476-477, 2014.
Kourtidis, K., S. Rapsomanikis, C. Zerefos, A.K. Georgoulias, E. Pavlidou, "Severe particulate pollution from the deposition practices of the primary materials of a cement plant", Environ. Science & Poll. Res., doi: 10.1007/s11356-014-2696-6, 2014.
Mitsakis, E., A. Papanikolaou, G. Ayfadopoulou, J. Salanova, C. Doll, G. Giannopoulos, C. Zerefos, "An integrated framework for linking climate change impacts to emergency adaptation strategies for transport networks", Eur. Transp. Res. Rev., 6:103-111, doi: 10.1007/s12544-013-0114-0, 2014.
Poupkou, A., K. Markakis, N. Liora, T. Giannaros, P. Zanis, U. Im, N. Daskalakis, S. Myriokefalitakis, J. Kaiser, D. Melas, M. Kanakidou, T. Karacostas, C. Zerefos, "A modeling study of the impact of the 2007 Greek forest fires on the gaseous pollutant levels in the Eastern Mediterranean", Atmosph. Res., 148, 1-17, 2014.
Zerefos, C. S., P. Tetsis, A. Kazantzidis, V. Amiridis, S. C. Zerefos, J. Luterbacher, K. Eleftheratos, E. Gerasopoulos, S. Kazadzis, A. Papayannis, "Further evidence of important environmental information content in red-to-green ratios as depicted in paintings by great masters", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 2987-3015, 2014. Selected as "Research Spotlight" by the Editors of the Journal.
Zerefos, C. S., K. Tourpali, P. Zanis, K. Eleftheratos, C. Repapis, A. Goodman, D. Wuebbles, I. S. A. Isaksen, J. Luterbacher, "Evidence for an earlier greenhouse cooling effect in the stratosphere before 1980 over the Northern Hemisphere", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 7705-7720, 2014.
Aggelis, D., P. Zanis, C. Zerefos, A.F. Bais, P. Nastos, "Mapping of surface ozone seasonality and trends across Europe during 1997-2006 through kriging interpolation to observational data", Water, Air & Soil Poll., Vol. 224 (4), art. no. 1501, doi: 10.1007/s11270-013-1501-9, 2013.
Eleftheratos, K., I. Isaksen, C. Zerefos, P. Nastos, K. Tourpali, B. Rognerud, "Ozone variations derived by a chemical transport model", Water, Air & Soil Poll., Vol. 224 (6), art. no. 1585, 2013.
Inness, A., Baier, F., Benedetti, A., Bouarar, I., Chabrillat, S., Clark, H., Clerbaux, C., Coheur, P., Engelen, R. J., Errera, Q., Flemming, J., George, M., Granier, C., Hadji-Lazaro, J., Huijnen, V., Hurtmans, D., Jones, L., Kaiser, J. W., Kapsomenakis, J., Lefever, K., Leit?o, J., Razinger, M., Richter, A., Schultz, M. G., Simmons, A. J., Suttie, M., Stein, O., Th?paut, J.-N., Thouret, V., Vrekoussis, M., Zerefos, C., and the MACC team: The MACC reanalysis: an 8 yr data set of atmospheric composition, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 4073-4109, doi:10.5194/acp-13-4073-2013, 2013.
Im U., Daskalakis N., Markakis K., Vrekoussis M., Hjorth J., Myriokefalitakis S., Gerasopoulos E., Kouvarakis G., Richter A., Burrows J., Pozzoli L., Unal A., Kindap T., Kanakidou M.: Simulated Air Quality and Pollutant Budgets over Europe in 2008, Science of the Total Environment 470-471 (2014) 270-281, 2013.
Kalabokas P. D., A. Volz-Thomas, V. Thouret, J.-P. Cammas, D. Boulanger and C.C. Repapis, "Examination of the atmospheric conditions associated with high and low vertical ozone measurements in the lower troposphere over the Eastern Mediterranean". Atmos. Chem. Phys., vol. 13, issue 20, 10339-10352, 2013.
Kalabokas P. D., J.-P. Cammas, V. Thouret, A. Volz-Thomas, D. Boulanger and C.C. Repapis, "Examination of the atmospheric conditions associated with high and low vertical ozone measurements in the lower troposphere over the Eastern Mediterranean, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Disc., 13, 2457-2491, 2013.
Kalabokas P. D., "Atmospheric conditions associated with high and low ozone concentrations in the lower troposphere over the Eastern Mediterranean (Aegean Sea)", Global NEST Journal, 15, 143-151, 2013.
Konsta D., H. Chepfer, and J.L. Dufresne, 2013: Evaluation of Cloud Description in General Circulation Models Using A-Train Observations. Advances in Meteorology, Climatology and Atmospheric Physics Springer Atmospheric Sciences, pp 541-546, 2013.
Nastos, P.T., Politi, N., Kapsomenakis, J., "Spatial and temporal variability of the Aridity Index in Greece", Atmospheric Research 119 , pp. 140-152, 2013.
Nastos, P.T., Kapsomenakis, J., Douvis, K.C., "Analysis of precipitation extremes based on satellite and high-resolution gridded data set over Mediterranean basin", Atmospheric Research, 131 , 46-59, 2013 .
Tselioudis, G., W. Rossow, Y.-C. Zhang, and D. Konsta: Global weather states and their properties from passive and active satellite cloud retrievals. J. Climate, 26, 7734-7746, doi:10.1175/JCLI-13-00024.1., 2013.
Vrekoussis, M., A. Richter, A. Hilboll, J. Burrows, E. Gerasopoulos, J. Lelieveld, L. Barrie, C. Zerefos, N. Mihalopoulos "Economic Crisis Detected from Space: Air Quality observations over Athens/Greece", GRL, Vol. 40, 1-6, doi: 10.1002/grl.50118, 2013.
Amiridis, V., C. Zerefos, S. Kazadzis, E. Gerasopoulos, K. Eleftheratos, M. Vrekoussis, A. Stohl, R.E. Mamouri, P. Kokkalis, A. Papayannis, K. Eleftheriadis, E. Diabouli, I. Keramitsoglou, C. Kontoes, V. Kotroni, K. Lagouvardos, E. Marinou, E. Giannakaki, E. Kostopoulou, C. Giannakopoulos, A. Richter, J.P. Burrows and N. Mihalopoulos, "Impact of the 2009 Attica wild fires on the air quality in urban Athens", Atmos. Envir., 46, 536-544, doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.07.056, 2012.
Balis, D., I.S.A. Isaksen, C. Zerefos, I. Zyrichidou, K. Eleftheratos, K. Troupali, R. Bojkov, B. Rognerud, F. Stordal, O.A. Sovde, Y. Orsolini, "Observed and Modelled record ozone decline over the Arctic during winter/spring 2011", Geophys. Res. Lett., vol. 38, L23801, 5pp, doi: 10.1029/2011GL049259, 2011.
Bender, F.A.-M., V. Ramanathan, and G. Tselioudis, 2011: Changes in extratropical storm track cloudiness 1983-2008: Observational support for a poleward shift. Clim. Dynam., doi:10.1007/s00382-011-1065-6.
Eleftheratos, K., C.S. Zerefos, and C. Varotsos, "Interannual variability of cirrus clouds in the tropics at ENSO regions based on ISCCP satellite data", Int. J. of Rem. Sens., doi: 10.1080/01431161.2010.510491, 2011.
Eleftheratos, K., C. Zerefos, E. Gerasopoulos, I. Isaksen, B. Rognerud, S. Dalsοren, C. Varotsos "A note on the comparison between total ozone from Oslo CTM2 and SBUV satellite data", Int. J. of Rem. Sens., 32: 9, 2535-2545, 2011.
Haynes, J.M., C. Jakob, W.B. Rossow, G. Tselioudis, and J. Brown, 2011: Major characteristics of Southern Ocean cloud regimes and their effects on the energy budget. J. Climate, 24, 5061-5080, doi:10.1175/2011JCLI4052.1.
Kanakidou, M., Mihalopoulos, N., Kindap, T., Im, U., Gerasopoulos , E., Vrekoussis, M., Dermitzaki, E., Unal, A., Ko?ak, M., Markakis, K, Melas, M., Kouvarakis, G., Youssef, A. F., Hatziannastassiou, N., Hilboll, A., Ebojie, F., Wittrock, F., von Savigny, C., Burrows, J., Ladstaetter-Weissenmayer, A, Moubasher., H.: Megacities as hot spots of air pollution in the East Mediterranean, Atmos. Env., doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.11.048, 2011.
Kazantzidis, A., K. Eleftheratos, C.S. Zerefos "Effects of cirrus cloudiness on solar irradiance in four spectral bands", Atm. Res., 102, 452-459, 2011.
Nastos, P.T., C.S. Zerefos "Climate Change and precipitation in Greece", Hellenic Journal of Geosciences, 45, 185-191, 2011.
Nastos, P.T., C.M. Philandras, D. Founda, C.S. Zerefos, "Air temperature trends related to changes in atmospheric cirulation in the wider area of Greece", Int. J. of Rem. Sens., Vol. 32, 3, 737-750, doi:10.1080/01431161.2010.517796, 2011.
Nastos P.T., Philandras, C.M., J. Kapsomenakis and K. Eleftheratos "Variability and Trends of mean Maximum and mean Minimum air temperature in Greece from Ground-Based Observations and NCEP-NCAR Reanalysis, Gridded Data", Int. J. of Rem. Sens, ifirst 1-16, 2011.
Philandras C.M., P.T. Nastos, J. Kapsomenakis, K.C. Douvis, G. Tselioudis and C.S. Zerefos, "Long Term Precipitation trends and Variability within the Mediterranean Region", Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 11, 3235-3250, 2011.
Poupkou, A., P. Zanis, P. Nastos, D. Papanastasiou, D. Melas, K. Tourpali, C. Zerefos "Present climate trend analysis of the Etesian winds in the Aegean Sea", Theor. Appl. Climatol., DOI 10.1007/s00704-011-0443-7, 2011.
Poupkou, A., P. Nastos, D. Melas, C. Zerefos, "Discomfort Index and Air Quality Index in a large urban Mediterranean Agglomeration", Water, Air & Soil Poll., Vol. 22 (1-4_, pp. 163-183, doi: 10.1007/s11270-011-0814-9, 2011.
Rinaldi, M, Decesari, S, Carbone, C, Finessi, E, Fuzzi, S, Ceburnis, D, O'Dowd, C, Sciare, J, Burrows, J.P, Vrekoussis, M, Ervens, B and Facchini, M.C : Evidence of a natural marine source of oxalic acid and a possible link to glyoxal, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D16204, doi:10.1029/2011JD015659, 2011.
Eleftheratos, Κ., G. Tselioudis, C. Zerefos, P. Nastos, C. Douvis & I. Kapsomenakis "Observed and predicted climate changes in Uruguay and adjacent areas", Hellenic Journal of Geosciences, vol. 45, 83-90, 2010.
Giannakopoulos, C., P. Hadjinicolaou, E. Kostopoulou, K.V. Varotsos, C. Zerefos "Precipitation and temperature regime over Cyprus as a result of global climate change", Adv. Geosci., 23, 17-24, 2010.
Hadjinicolaou, P., C. Zerefos, M.A. Lange, S. Pashiardis, J. Lelieveld, "Mid-21st century climate and weather extremes in Cyprus as projected by six regional climate models", Reg. Environ. Change, doi: 10.1007/s10113-010-0153-1, 2010.
Huijnen, V., H.J. Eskes, A. Poupkou, H. Elbern, K.F. Boersma, G. Foret, M. Sofiev, A. Valdebenito, J. Flemming, O. Stein, A. Gross, L. Robertson, M. D'Isidoro, I. Kioutsioukis, E. Friese, B. Amstrup, R. Bergstrom, A. Strunk, J. Vira, D. Zyryanov, A. Maurizi, D. Melas, V.H. Peuch, C. Zerefos, "Comparison of OMI NO2 tropospheric columns with an ensemble of global and European regional air quality models", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 3273-3296, 2010.
Kalabokas, P.D. , A. D. Adamopoulos, L. G. Viras, "Αtmospheric PM10 particle concentration measurements at central and peripheral urban sites in Athens and Thessaloniki, Greece", Global NEST J. , 12, 71-83, 2010.
Kioutsioukis, I., D. Melas, C. Zerefos, "Statistical assessment of changes in climate extremes over Greece", Int. J. Climat., 30, 1723-1737, doi:10.1002/joc.2030, 2010.
Kuglitsch, F.G., A. Toreti, E. Xoplaki, P.M. Della-Marta, C.S. Zerefos, M. Turkes, J. Luterbacher "Heat wave changes in the eastern Mediterranean since 1960", Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L04802, doi: 10.1029/2009GL041841, 2010. Selected as "Research Spotlight" from the American Geophysical Union (AGU).
Luterbacher J., S.J. Koenig, J. Franke, G. van der Schrier, E. Zorita, A. Moberg, J. Jacobeit, P.M. Della-Marta, M. Kuttel, E. Xoplaki, D. Wheeler, T. Rutishauer, M. Stossel, H. Wanner, R. Brazdil, P. Dobrovolny, D. Camuffo, C. Bertolin, A. van Engelen, F.J. Gonzalez-Rouco, R. Wilson, C. Pfister, D. Limanowka, O. Nordli, L. Leijonhufvud, J. Soderberg, R. Allan, M. Barriendos, R. Glaser, D. Riemann, Z. Hao, C.S. Zerefos, "Circulation dynamics and its influence on European and Mediterranean January-April climate over the past half millennium: results and insights from instrumental data, documentary evidence and coupled climate models", Clim. Change, 101, 201-234, doi: 10.1007/s10584-009-9782-0, 2010.
Markakis, K., A. Poupkou, D. Melas, C. Zerefos, "A GIS based anthropogenic PM10 emission inventory for Greece", Atmos. Pollution Res., 1, 71-81, 2010.
Nastos, P.T., C. S. Zerefos, "Cyclic modes of the intra-annual variability of precipitation in Greece", Adv. Geosci., 25, 45-50, 2010.
Oikonomou, C., H.A. Flocas, G. Katavoutas, M. Hatzaki, D.N. Asimakopoulos, C. Zerefos, "On the relationship of orography with extreme dry spells in Greece", Adv. Geosci., 25, 161-166. Doi: 10.5194/adgeo-25-161-2010, 2010.
Ordonez, C., N. Elguindi, O. Stein, V. Huijnen, J. Flemming, A. Inness, H. Flentje, E. Katragkou, P. Moinat, V-H. Peuch, A. Segers, V. Thouret, G. Athier, M. van Weele, C. S. Zerefos, J-P. Cammas, M. G. Schultz, "Global model simulations of air pollution during the 2003 European heat wave", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 789-815, 2010.
Philandras, C.M., P. T. Nastos ,A. G. Paliatsos, C.C. Repapis "Study of the rain intensity in Athens and Thessaloniki Greece", Adv. In Geosc., 23, 37-40, 2010.
Poupkou, A., T. Giannaros, K. Markakis, I. Kioutsioukis, G. Curci, D. Melas, C. Zerefos, "A model for European Biogenic Volatile Organic Compound emissions: Software development and first validation", Environmental Modelling & Software, 25, 1845-1856, 2010.
Romanou, A., G. Tselioudis, C.S. Zerefos, C.A. Clayson, J.A. Curry, A. Andersson, "Evaporation-Precipitation Variability over the Mediterranean and the Black Seas from Satellite and Reanalysis Estimates", J. of Climate, 23, 5268-5287, 2010.
Tselioudis, G., and W. B. Rossow, "Time scales of variability of the tropical atmosphere derived from cloud-defined weather states", Journal of Climate, 10, 2010.
Tselioudis, G., E. Tromeur, W. Rossow, C. Zerefos "Decadal changes in tropical convection suggest effects on stratospheric water vapor", Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L14806, doi:10.1029/2010GL044092, 2010.
Amiridis, V., M. Kafatos, C. Perez, S. Kazadzis, E. Gerasopoulos, R.E. Mamouri, A. Papayannis, P. Kokkalis, E. Giannakaki, S. Basart, I. Daglis and C. Zerefos "The potential of the synergistic use of passive and active remote sensing measurements for the validation of a regional dust model", Ann. Geophys., 27, 3155-3164, 2009.
Balis, D., R. Bojkov, K. Tourpali, C. Zerefos "Characteristics of the ozone decline over both hemispheres", Int. J. of Rem. Sens., 30:15, 3887-2895, 2009.
Founda, D., H.D. Kambezidis, M. Petrakis, P. Zanis, C. Zerefos, "A Correction of the Recent Air Temperature Record at the Historical Meteorological Station of the National Observatory of Athens (NOA) due to Instrument Change", Theor. & Applied Clim. 97:385-389, 2009.
Founda D., S. Lykoudis., B.E. Psiloglou, M. Petrakis, C.S. Zerefos, "Observations of the atmospheric surface layer parameters during the total solar eclipse of March 29th, 2006 in Greece", Meteorol. Z, 18, 5, 489-494, 2009.
Georgoulias, A.K., D. Balis, M.E. Koukouli, C. Meleti, A. Bais, C. Zerefos, "A study of the total atmospheric sulphur dioxide load using ground-based measurements and the satellite derived Sulfur Dioxide Index", Atmos. Envir., 43(9), 1693-1701, 2009.
Gerasopoulos, E., P. Kokkalis, V. Amiridis, E. Liakakou, C. Perez, K. Haustein, K. Eleftheratos, M.O. Andreae, T.W. Andreae, C.S. Zerefos "Dust specific extinction cross-sections over the Eastern Mediterranean using the BSC/DREAM model and sun photometer data: the case of urgan environments", Ann. Geophys., 27, 2903-2912, 2009.
Giannakopoulos, C., P. Hadjinicolaou, C. Zerefos, G. Demosthenous, "Changing energy requirements in the Meidterranean under changing climatic conditions", Energies, 2, 805-815, doi:10.3390/en20400805, 2009.
Kazantzidis, A., A.F. Bais, M.M. Zempila, C. Meleti, K. Eleftheratos, C.S. Zerefos, "Evaluation of ozone column measurements over Greece with NILU-UV multi-channel radiometers", Int. J. of Rem. Sens., 30:15, 4273-4281, 2009.
Meleti C., Bais A.F., Kazadzis S., Kouremeti N., Garane K., Zerefos C., "Factors affecting solar UV irradiance, measured since 1990 at Thessaloniki, Greece", Int. J. of Rem. Sens., 30, 15-16, 4167-4179, 2009.
Nastos, P.T., C.S. Zerefos, "Spatial and temporal variability of consecutive dry and wet days in Greece", Atmos. Res., 94, 616-628, 2009.
Saad-Lessler, J. and G. Tselioudis: Storms, Climate Change, and the US Economy: A National Analysis, Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Vol. 9-1, 2009.
Tourpali, K., A.F. Bais, A. Kazantzidis, C.S. Zerefos, H. Akiyoshi, J. Austin, C. Br?hl, N. Butchart, M.P. Chipperfield, M. Dameris, M. Deushi, V. Eyring, M.A. Giorgetta, D.E. Kinnison, E. Mancini, D.R. Marsh, T. Nagashima, G. Pitari, D.A. Plummer, E. Rozanov, K. Shibata, and W. Tian, Clear sky UV simulations in the 21st century based on Ozone and Temperature Projections from Chemistry-Climate Models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 1165-1172, 2009.
Zerefos, C. S., C. Meleti, K. Eleftheratos, S. Kazadzis, A. Romanou, C. Ichoku, G. Tselioudis, and A. Bais, "Solar dimming and brightening over Thessaloniki, Greece, and Beijing, China", Tellus B, DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0889.2009.00425.x, 2009.
Zscheppang A., Manes F., La Torre G., Boccia A., Trueman S., Sarigiannis D., Kalabokas P., Artinano B., Perrino C., Fernandez Patier R., Rigby M., Jankovic S., Kirch W. Methodology for measuring environmental health within Europe. Health Risk from Environmental Pollution Level in Urban Systems (HEREPLUS), Italian Journal of Public Health, Vol.5, Num.4, 284-287, 2009.
Gerasopoulos, E., C.S. Zerefos, I. Tsagouri, D. Founda, V. Amiridis, A. F. Bais, A. Belehaki, N. Christou, G. Economou, M. Kanakidou, A. Karamanos, M. Petrakis, and P. Zanis, "The Total Solar Eclipse of March 2006: overview", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 5205-5220, 2008.
Harris N.R.P., E. Kyro, J. Staehelin, D. Brunner, S-B. Andersen, S. Godin-Beekmann, S. Dhomse, P. Hadjinicolaou, G. Hansen, I. Isaksen, A. Jrrar, A. Karpetchko, R. Kivi, B. Knudsen, P. Krizan, J. Lastovicka, J. Maeder, Y. Orsolini, J.A. Pyle, M. Rex, K. Vanicek, M. Weber, I. Wohltmann, P. Zanis, and C.S. Zerefos, "Ozone trends at northern mid- and high latitudes - a European perspective", Annales Geophysicae, 26, 1207-1220, 2008.
Isaksen, I.S.A., B. Rognerud, G. Myhre, J.D. Haigh, S.T. Rumbold, K.P. Shine, C.S. Zerefos, K. Tourpali, W. Randel, "Radiative forcing from modelled and observed stratospheric ozone changes due to the 11-year solar cycle", Atmos. Chem. Phys. Disc., 8, 4353-4371, 2008.
Kalabokas, P. D., N. Mihalopoulos, R. Ellul, S. Kleanthous, C.C. Repapis "An investigation of the meteorological and photochemical factors influencing the background rural and marine surface ozone levels in the central and eastern Mediterranean", Atmospheric Environment, 42, 7894-7906, 2008.
Nastos, P., C.S. Zerefos, "Decadal changes in extreme daily precipitation in Greece", Adv. in Geosc., 16, 55-62, 2008.
Philandras C.M., P.T. Nastos, C.C. Repapis, "Air Temperature Variability and Trends over Greece", Global Nest Journal, Vol 10, No2, pp273-285, 2008.
Poupkou, A., D. Melas, I. Ziomas, P. Symeonidis, I. Lisaridis, E. Gerasopoulos, C.S. Zerefos, "Simulated summertime regional ground-level ozone concentrations over Greece", Water, Air & Soil Pollution, doi: 10.1007/s11270-008-9766-0, 196, 169-181 , 2008.
Zanis, P., I. Kapsomenakis, C. Philandras, K. Douvis, D. Nikolakis, E. Kanellopoulou, C.S. Zerefos, C. Repapis, "Analysis of an ensemble of present-day and future Regional Climate Simulations for Greece", Int. J. of Clim., DOI: 10.1002/joc.1809, 2008.
Amiridis, V., D. Melas, D. S. Balis, A. Papayannis, D. Founda, E. Katragkou, E. Giannakaki, R. E. Mamouri, E. Gerasopoulos, C. Zerefos, "Aerosol Lidar observations and model calculations of the Planetary Boundary Layer evolution over Greece, during the March 2006 Total Solar Eclipse", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 6181-6189, 2007.
Eleftheratos, K., C.S. Zerefos, P. Zanis, D.S. Balis, G. Tselioudis, K. Gierens, R. Sausen, "A study on natural and manmade global interannual fluctuations of cirrus cloud cover for the period 1984-2004", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 2631-2642, 2007.
Founda, D., D. Melas, S. Lykoudis, I. Lisaridis, E. Gerasopoulos, G. Kouvarakis, M. Petrakis, C. Zerefos, "The effect of the total solar eclipse of 29 March 2006 on meteorological variables in Greece", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5543-5553, 2007.
Kazantzidis A., A. F. Bais, C. Emde, S. Kazadzis, C. S. Zerefos, "Attenuation of global ultraviolet and visible irradiance over Greece during the total solar eclipse of 29 March 2006", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5959-5969, 2007.
Kazadzis, S., A. Bais, V. Amiridis, D. Balis, C. Meleti, N. Kouremeti, C. S. Zerefos, S. Rapsomanikis, M. Petrakakis, A. Kelesis, P. Tzoumaka, K. Kelektsoglou, "Nine years of UV aerosol optical depth measurements at Thessaloniki, Greece", Atmos. Chem. & Phys., 7, 2091-2101, 2007.
Nastos, P.T., C.S. Zerefos, "On extremely daily precipitation totals in Athens, Greece", Adv. Geosci., 10, 59-66, 2007.
Tourpali K., C.S. Zerefos, D.S. Balis, A.F. Bais, "The 11-year solar cycle in stratospheric ozone: Comparison between Umkehr and SBUVv8 and effects on surface erythemal irradiance", J. Geophys. Res., 112, D12306, doi:10.1029/2006JD007760, 2007.
Zanis P., A. Ganser, C. Zellweger, S. Henne, M. Stinbacher and J. Stahelin, "Seasonal Variability of measured ozone production efficiencies in the lower free troposphere of Central Europe", Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 7, 223-236, 2007.
Zanis, P., E. Katragkou, M. Kanakidou, B. Psiloglou, S. Karathanasis, M. Vrekoussis, E. Gerasopoulos, I. Lysaridis, K. Markakis, A. Poupkou, V. Amiridis, D. Melas, N. Mihalopoulos, C. Zerefos, "Effects on surface atmospheric photo-oxidants over Greece during the total solar eclipse event on 29 March 2006", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 6061-6073, 2007.
Zerefos, C., E. Gerasopoulos, I. Tsagouri, B. Psiloglou, A. Belehaki, T. Herekakis, A. Bais, S. Kazadzis, C. Eleftheratos, N. Kalivitis, N. Mihalopoulos, "Evidence of gravity waves into the atmosphere during the March 2006 total solar eclipse", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4943-4951, 2007.
Zerefos., C., V. Gerogiannis, D. Balis, S. Zerefos, A. Kazantzidis, "Atmospheric effects of volcanic eruptions as seen by famous artists and depicted in their paintings", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4027-4042, 2007.
Zerefos, C., K. Eleftheratos, P. Zanis, D. Balis, G. Tselioudis, "Search for Man-Made Cirrus Contrails over SE Asia", Terr. Atmos. Ocean. Sci. Journal, Vol. 18, No 3, 459-474, 2007.
Gerasopoulos E., P. Zanis, C. Papastefanou, C. S. Zerefos, A. Ioannidou, H. Wernli, "A complex case study of down to the surface intrusions of persistent stratospheric air over the Eastern Mediterranean", Atmos. Envir., 40, 4113-4125, 2006.
Kalabokas, P.D., A. D. Adamopoulos, G. Chronopoulos, L. G. Viras, "A study on the characteristic variations of PM10 atmospheric concentrations in Athens", Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 15, No 8b,846-852, 2006.
Kalabokas, P.D., C.C. Repapis and H. Mantis, "A field study on the origins of surface ozone at the periphery of the urban area of Athens", Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 15, No8b, 878-882, 2006.
Kazantzidis, A., A.F. Bais, J. Grobner, J.R. Herman, S. Kazadzis, N. Krotkov, E. Kyro, P.N. den Outer, K. Garane, P. Gorts, K. Lakkala, C. Meleti, H. Slaper, R.B. Tax, T. Turunen, C.S. Zerefos, "Comparison of satellite-derived UV irradiances with ground-based measurements at four European stations", J. Geophys. Res, 111, D13207, doi: 10.1029/2005JD006672, 2006.
Rex, M., R.J. Salawitch, H. Deckelmann, P. von der Gathen, N.R.P. Harris, M.P. Chipperfield, B. Naujokat, E. Reimer, M. Allaart, S.B. Andersen, R. Bevilacqua, G.O. Braathen, H. Claude, J. Davies, H. De Backer, H. Dier, V. Dorokhov, H. Fast, M. Gerding, S. Godin-Beekmann, K. Hoppel, B. Johnson, E. Kyr?, Z. Litynska, D. Moore, H. Nakane, M.C. Parrondo, A.D. Riskley, Jr., P. Skrivankova, R. St?bi, P. Viatte, V. Yushkov, C. Zerefos, "Arctic winter 2005: Implications for stratospheric ozone loss and climate change", Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L23808, doi: 10.1029/2006GL026731, 2006.
Zanis P., A. Ganser, C. Zellweger, S. Henne and M. Steinbacher, "Seasonal variability of measured Ozone Production Efficiencies in the lower free troposphere of Central Europe", Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions, 6, 9315-9349, 2006.
Zanis P., E. Maillard, J. Stahelin, C. Zerefos, E. Kosmidis and K. Tourpali, "On the turnaround of stratospheric ozone trends deduced from the re-evaluated Umkehr record of Arosa, Switzerland", J. Geophys. Res., 111, D22307, doi: 10.1029/2005JD006886, 2006.
Zerefos, C., P. Nastos, D. Balis, A. Papayannis, A. Kelepertsis, E. Kanellopoulou, D. Nikolakis, K. Eleftheratos, W. Thomas, C. Varotsos, "A complex study of Etna's volcanic plume from ground-based, in situ and space-borne observations", Int. J. of Remote Sensing, 27, 9, 1855-1864, 2006.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


text:
Negligence, Engineer, Municipal employee. Subdivision Control, Plan.
CIVIL ACTION commenced in the Superior Court Department on February 1, 2007.
The case was heard by Thomas F. McGuire, Jr., J., on a motion for summary judgment.
William R. Landry for the plaintiff.
Julie Pruitt Barry for the defendants.
in work performed by Meridian's contractor that Meridian was forced to correct at a considerable additional cost. Because Meridian's claim falls outside the scope of the duty in tort of a professional to a third party under the doctrine announced in Craig v. Everett M. Brooks Co., 351 Mass. 497 (1967), we affirm.
1. Factual background. a. Formal arrangements for Windchime. These facts largely are drawn from the parties' consolidated statement of facts, viewed in the light most favorable to Meridian, the nonmoving party. The events that are the subject of this case occurred between 2002 and 2005 in a residential development in the town. Meridian engaged the services of a project engineer, DiPrete Engineering Associates, which prepared the site and engineering plans for the Windchime subdivision; a project manager, Richard Burton, of Meridian Real Estate Services, Inc.; and a contractor, Spring Garden Sand & Gravel, Inc., to construct the infrastructure. Meridian's contractor agreed to correct any defects in its work found within one year of substantial completion of the project. The town's planning board, in turn, in accordance with the town's subdivision rules and regulations, hired Earth Tech to conduct so-called "subdivision reviews and inspections." [Note 2] Meridian is not party to the contract between the town and Earth Tech. In accordance with § 4.2.1(c) of the rules and regulations, the cost of hiring Earth Tech was paid entirely by Meridian. Earth Tech conducted a definitive plan review of Meridian's proposed subdivision plan, as well as its revised plans, and submitted reports along with corresponding invoices only to the town. Those invoices were paid exclusively by the town based on the funds deposited by Meridian.
Earth Tech's inspection work over the course of the Windchime project is reflected in a series of approximately fifty written daily reports containing detailed statements of specific tasks performed or about to be performed by Meridian's contractor. In some instances these reports indicate whether the work performed by the contractor complies with requirements of the town's rules and regulations (accompanied by photographs of the work), contain information about the requirements of the town's rules and regulations, and point out specific deficiencies. Meridian also offered evidence that it relied on the inspection activities by Earth Tech "as our best protection against costly problems down the road whereby defective work might have to be corrected after other work above (or around) it had been completed after inspections, necessitating . . . destruction and re-construction of completed road/infrastructure elements."
c. Problems that required infrastructure reconstruction. Late in 2002 and again in 2004 it was discovered that Meridian's contractor had improperly installed water lines, fire hydrants, granite curbing, manhole covers, and other features of the infrastructure. The contractor's work had to be redone, and in some cases, ground had to be dug up to gain access to the improperly constructed infrastructure. Meridian offered evidence that, in some cases, Earth Tech did not identify the shortcomings and deficiencies with the contractor's work; and that if Earth Tech had conducted the inspections it was required to perform in a timely manner, Meridian would have been able to correct some of the deficiencies at far less cost by avoiding the need to dig and regrade the surface. Meridian's contractor was voluntarily dissolved on December 30, 2005.
allowance of a motion for summary judgment is de novo, see Miller v. Cotter, 448 Mass. 671 , 676 (2007), and turns on the answers to two questions. First, are all the material facts established in the record? Second, does the governing law entitle the successful party to judgment? See Augat, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 410 Mass. 117 , 120 (1991). We examine the factual materials in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Jupin v. Kask, 447 Mass. 141 , 143 (2006). Although Meridian's complaint sought recovery under both tort and contract theories, this appeal is concerned exclusively with the claim by Meridian that Earth Tech owed it a duty of care as a professional under contract with a third party, i.e., the town. [Note 8] In a well-reasoned memorandum, the motion judge concluded that Earth Tech did not owe a duty of care to Meridian and that there was no basis for a finding of liability.
b. Legal duty. "The existence of a legal duty is a question of law appropriate for resolution by summary judgment." Afarian v. Massachusetts Elec. Co., 449 Mass. 257 , 261 (2007). "If no such duty exists, a claim of negligence cannot be brought." Remy v. MacDonald, 440 Mass. 675 , 677 (2004). In Massachusetts, duty is "determined by balancing the foreseeability of harm, in light of all the circumstances, against the burden to be imposed." Vaughan v. Eastern Edison Co., 48 Mass. App. Ct. 225 , 229 (1999) (citation omitted). See Whittaker v. Saraceno, 418 Mass. 196 , 198-199 (1994); Jupin v. Kask, supra at 146-147.
c. Liability of professional to third party for negligent performance of contract. In Craig v. Everett M. Brooks Co., 351 Mass. at 498, 500, the defendant civil engineering firm, under contract with a landowner, was tasked to lay down "offset stakes" that it knew would be used by the plaintiff, a third-party contractor, to mark the location and grades of a road the contractor was to build for the landowner. The civil engineering firm knew the identity of the contractor, knew that the purpose of the staking was to enable the contractor to build the road, and knew that the contractor would rely on the "offset stakes"
in grading and locating the road. Id. at 500. Notwithstanding the absence of any contractual relationship between the civil engineering firm and the contractor, the Supreme Judicial Court reasoned that to bar recovery simply because there was no contract between them, in circumstances in which the civil engineering firm knew the identity of and the extent of reliance on the only possible plaintiff and where damages were not remote, would be contrary to evolving principles of tort law whereby in the absence of any express agreement, a party is liable to a third party for the foreseeable consequences of the negligent performance of a contractual duty that the third party owed to another. Id. at 501. The rule in Craig is referred to as "the Craig principle of foreseeable reliance." Page v. Frazier, 388 Mass. 55 , 65 (1983).
In a series of decisions subsequent to Craig, the appellate courts have refined the scope of the Craig doctrine. Whether a consequence is foreseeable is measured by an objective standard and calls for consideration of whether the injured party's reliance on the services performed by the negligent party was reasonable. See Wilson v. James L. Cooney Ins. Agency, 66 Mass. App. Ct. 156 , 163 (2006). See also McDonough v. Whalen, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 573 , 578 (1973), S. C., 365 Mass. 506 (1974) (in order to recover under Craig, plaintiff must prove that its reliance on allegedly negligent service performed by one with whom it was not in privity was justified). "[T]he critical document is the contract" between the negligent party and the party who paid for its services. Parent v. Stone & Webster Engr. Corp., 408 Mass. 108 , 113 (1990).
Under Craig, the determination whether the plaintiff's reliance on the services performed by the negligent party was known to that party is not satisfied by evidence that the plaintiff believed that the defendant was aware of its reliance. See Quigley v. Bay State Graphics, Inc., 427 Mass. 455 , 461-462 (1998). The allegedly negligent party must have "actual knowledge" of the plaintiff's reliance on its services. See Nycal Corp. v. KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, 426 Mass. 491 , 495 n.4 (1998).
the contractor to build the road. Craig v. Everett M. Brooks Co., 351 Mass. at 500. In the case at bar, on the other hand, the contract between Earth Tech, the allegedly negligent party, and the town provided that Earth Tech shall have no "authority or responsibility for the methods and procedures of construction selected by the Contractor." Furthermore, and of critical importance, at the outset of the Windchime project, Earth Tech supplied Meridian with a written memorandum in which it informed Meridian that any deviation from the approved subdivision plans in the construction of the infrastructure for Windchime, "without prior approval of Earth Tech, will be performed at the contractor's risk." Finally, and most fundamentally, this case is distinguishable from Craig because Meridian hired its own project engineer for Windchime. The fact that the project engineer may have failed to honor its contractual obligations to Meridian does not, standing alone, justify Meridian's reliance on the work performed by Earth Tech. See Anderson v. Fox Hill Village Homeowners Corp., 424 Mass. 365 , 368 (1997) ( "failure to perform a contractual obligation is not a tort in the absence of a duty to act apart from the promise made").
Meridian argues that there are genuine issues of material fact in dispute based on the assertions contained in its engineer's affidavit. For example, Meridian's engineer maintains that its "infrastructure contractor, now defunct, was responsible for the construction of the infrastructure, but was not responsible for the Engineering Inspection Function of the project. That function was 'owned' and controlled by Earth Tech, the town's only approved engineering inspector." Meridian also points to the fact that it actually relied on the daily reports prepared by Earth Tech as its "best protection against costly problems down the road whereby defective work might have to be corrected after other work above (or around) it had been completed after inspections, necessitating . . . destruction and re-construction of completed road/infrastructure elements."
firm to advise its contractor how to comply with the requirements of the approved subdivision plan and the town's subdivision rules and regulations. In fact, Meridian did hire a project engineer, but elected to rely on the town's consultant.
Meridian's other so-called genuine issues of material fact are simply statements of its belief that it was reasonable for it to take the risk that it could rely on the town's consultant to ensure that its (Meridian's) performance was in compliance with its legal obligations. However, in view of the nature of Earth Tech's contract with the town and Earth Tech's explicit, written memorandum issued to Meridian, it was neither reasonable nor justifiable for Meridian to rely on Earth Tech's performance of its contractual obligations to the town in ensuring that Meridian's own contractor complied with the requirements of the approved subdivision plan and the town's rules and regulations. See Page v. Frazier, 388 Mass. at 66.
[Note 1] Earth Tech Engineering Corp.; Earth Tech Environment and Infrastructure, Inc.; and Tyco International, Ltd.
[Note 2] There is no dispute that the infrastructure constructed by Meridian's contractor to serve the Windchime project was to become the property of the town.
[Note 3] "Prepare technical reports of our findings for the Planning Board's consideration."
[Note 4] "Field observations shall be conducted by the ENGINEER to evaluate the completed work of the contractor for substantial conformance to the current Planning Board Rules and Regulations and approved Contract Documents."
[Note 5] "The ENGINEER shall not, during such visits, or as a result of such observations of the Contractor's work in progress, supervise, direct, or have control over the Contractor's work, nor shall the ENGINEER have authority or responsibility for the methods and procedures of construction selected by the Contractor, . . . or failure of the Contractor to comply with all other laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, or orders incident to the work of the Contractor."
[Note 6] Earth Tech's memorandum also included details of the inspections it anticipated conducting of several aspects of the project, including "Underground Utilities." With reference to the storm drains, the memorandum stated that it was anticipated that the "inspection should be conducted after installation of piping and drain structures, but prior to backfilling." Likewise, the memorandum stated that it was anticipated that the inspection of the "sanitary sewer system" would take place "after installation of piping and sanitary structures, but prior to backfilling."
[Note 7] For purposes of reviewing the grant of summary judgment, we accept Meridian's claim that its own project engineer was not regularly reviewing the work of its contractor.
[Note 8] In particular, Meridian has not sought review of the adverse ruling by the motion judge on its claim that it was an intended beneficiary of the contract between Earth Tech and the town. See Anderson v. Fox Hill Village Homeowners Corp., 424 Mass. 365 , 366-367 (1997).
[Note 9] We decline to award the appellate attorney's fees requested by Earth Tech.

matches:
v.
§ 4
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.


text:
The United States Supreme Court held that obtaining cellular location data constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and thus requires a warrant supported by probable cause. An individual, suspected of being involved in a series of store robberies, sought an order that his rights under the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches, had been violated when law enforcement obtained records of his cellular location data for the time periods during which the robberies took place. In a 5-4 decision, the Court expressed concern that cellphone records can provide “near perfect surveillance” and that the data is retained for many years and for all users, and held that an individual does have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in respect of their cellphone location information. Accordingly, the Court ruled that the accessing of the individual’s cellphone location data was an unconstitutional search and therefore a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
In 2011, police officers arrested four men in connection with a series of robberies at RadioShack and T-Mobile stores in Michigan and Ohio, USA. One of these men provided a confession which included the cellphone numbers of some of his accomplices which the federal prosecutors then used in applying for cell records under the Stored Communications Act, 1994. This legislation allows the government to compel certain telecommunications records upon “specific and articulable facts showing there are reasonable grounds to believe … [the records] are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation” [p. 3]. Timothy Carpenter was one of the individuals whose number had been provided to law enforcement and whose records were obtained as a result.
The material sought by prosecutors was “cell-site location information” or CSLI. CSLI is created when cell phones, which continually search for and interact with radio antennas (called cell sites) connect with a site closest to the phone and the relevant network creates time-stamped records of those connections. Cellphone networks store and maintain CSLI for their own purposes, such as identifying network flaws and sharing aggregated location information with data brokers. As modern smart phones connect to networks several times per minute even when not active these phones and urban networks can generate CSLI that exhaustively and accurately catalog a cell phone user’s movements.
On application from the prosecutors, federal magistrate judges issued orders compelling Carpenter’s wireless carriers to produce CSLI for Carpenter’s cellphone “at call origination and at call termination for incoming and outgoing calls” during the four-month period when the string of robberies occurred” [p. 3]. The prosecutors received information detailing 12,898 location points or an average of 101 location points on Carpenter’s movements per day and, partly as a result of this information, charged Carpenter with six counts of robbery and six counts of “carrying a firearm during a federal crime of violence in federal district court”. Carpenter was convicted on all but one of the firearm counts and sentenced to 100 years in prison. Carpenter appealed his conviction, arguing that the use of the CSLI evidence violated the Fourth Amendment of the U.C. Constitution which protects “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit dismissed his appeal, holding that “Carpenter lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the location information collected by the FBI because he had shared that information with his wireless carriers” [p. 4]. The Court found that Carpenter was not entitled to the protection of the Fourth Amendment because cellphone users “voluntarily convey cell-site data to their carriers as ‘a means of establishing communication’” [p. 4].
Carpenter then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan, delivered the opinion of the Court. The central issue for the Court to determine was whether obtaining cellphone location records constituted a “search” for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment, and whether, if so, that search had been constitutional.
With reference to the case of Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco, 387 U. S. 523, 528 (1967), the Court noted that the basic purpose of the Fourth Amendment “is to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials.” It added that “in Katz v. United States, 389 U. S. 347, 351 (1967), we established that ‘the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places,’ and expanded our conception of the Amendment to protect certain expectations of privacy as well” [p. 5].
The Court stated that its jurisprudence had established two “basic guideposts”: in Boyd v. United States, 116 U. S. 616, 630 (1886) that the Fourth Amendment “seeks to secure ‘the privacies of life’ against ‘arbitrary power’;” and in United States v. Di Re, 332 U. S. 581, 595 (1948) that “a central aim of the Framers was ‘to place obstacles in the way of a too permeating police surveillance’.” [p. 6]. The Court stressed that it has used these principles in interpreting the Fourth Amendment in respect of developing surveillance technology.
The Court recognized that the present case – with its focus on “digital data – personal location information maintained by a third party” – did “not fit neatly under existing precedents” [p. 7] but noted that there were two broad themes in its jurisprudence which could be applied to the present case. The first set of cases “addresses a person’s expectation of privacy in his physical location and movements” [p. 7]. In United States v. Knotts, 460 U. S. 276 (1983) the Court had held that the use by law enforcement of a “beeper” to track a suspect’s car did not constitute a “search” for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment because an individual driving a car on public roads had no reasonable expectation of privacy [p. 8]. However, in the Knotts case the Court had noted that the precedent may not be applicable to more invasive forms of surveillance. In United States v. Jones 565 U. S. 400, 405 (2012) the Court did assess the constitutionality of greater forms of surveillance, holding that by placing a GPS device in a suspect’s car, the FBI was able to monitor every movement of that individual which was an infringement of his privacy.
The second set of cases involved the Court “draw[ing] a line between what a person keeps to himself and what he shares with others” and stressing that “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties” [p. 9]. The Court referred to the cases of United States v. Miller 425 U. S. 435, 443 (1976) and Smith v. Maryland 442 U. S. 735, 745 (1979) which had held that by using bank checks and placing telephone calls respectively the individuals in these cases had assumed the risk that the information would be provided to police [p. 10].
In applying these two strands of cases to the present case, the Court recognized the difficulty in reconciling the two competing doctrines in Fourth Amendment cases: one protecting privacy in one’s physical location and movements, and another finding a reduced expectation of privacy in information shared with third parties. The Court held that the principles established in the Miller and Smith cases could not be extended to the use of CSLI information, and that, “an individual maintains a legitimate expectation of privacy in the record of his physical movements as captured through CSLI” [p. 12]. Accordingly, the Court held that the “location information obtained from Carpenter’s wireless carriers was the product of a search” [p. 12].
The Court noted that “[a] person does not surrender all Fourth Amendment protection by venturing into the public sphere” [p. 12]. It noted that, in the past, it would have been physically impossible for law enforcement to monitor an individual indefinitely, and that there was therefore no expectation that an individual would be subjected to such surveillance. The Court commented that “[a]llowing government access to cell-site records contravenes that expectation” [p. 12]. The Court highlighted the privacy concerns inherent in CSIL data access. It Court noted that tracking cellphone positioning using CSIL “present even greater privacy concerns” than tracking a vehicle using GPS because individuals keep their cellphones on them almost constantly and so “when the Government tracks the location of a cell phone it achieves near perfect surveillance, as if it had attached an ankle monitor to the phone’s user” [p. 13]. The Court also commented on the retroactive nature of the CSIL data, and that “the Government can now travel back in time to retrace a person’s whereabouts, subject only to the retention polices of the wireless carriers, which currently maintain records for up to five years” [p. 13]. In addition, the CSIL data is retained by the networks for all users which meant that “this newfound tracking capacity runs against everyone” and not just those under official investigation [p. 13].
In rejecting the government’s argument that the third-party principle from the Miller case applied to the present case, the Court noted that the government position “fails to contend with the seismic shifts in digital technology that made possible the tracking of not only Carpenter’s location but also everyone else’s, not for a short period but for years and years” [p. 15]. It commented that “[t]he Government thus is not asking for a straightforward application of the third-party doctrine, but instead a significant extension of it to a distinct category of information” [p. 15].
The Court stated that because of its finding that obtaining CSIL records constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement is required to obtain a warrant supported by probable cause in order to access these records [p. 18]. It did recognize that there may be some rare exceptions, for example, “if law enforcement is confronted with an urgent situation, such fact-specific threats will likely justify the warrantless collection of CSLI” [p. 22]. As the Stored Communications Act merely requires the government to show “reasonable grounds” for believing that the CSIL data were relevant to an investigation, the Court held that this fell short of the standard required by “probable cause” and the search was therefore unconstitutional.
In closing, the Court held that “[i]n light of the deeply revealing nature of CSLI, its depth, breadth, and comprehensive reach, and the inescapable and automatic nature of its collection, the fact that such information is gathered by a third party does not make it any less deserving of Fourth Amendment protection” and that as “[t]he Government’s acquisition of the cell-site records here was a search under that Amendment” it “decline[d] to grant the state unrestricted access to a wireless carrier’s database of physical location information” [p. 22].
Justice Kennedy delivered a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Thomas and Alito, which expressed concern that the Supreme Court was departing from Fourth Amendment precedent, which should have guided the Court to find that there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment. This dissenting judgment noted that there should be no difference between CSIL data and other business records that – following the Miller case – law enforcement is entitled to obtain from a suspect without implicating the Fourth Amendment. It added that it would have found that Carpenter had no reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of his CSIL records and noted that a “person’s movements are not particularly private” [p. 17].
Justice Thomas delivered a dissenting opinion which stated that the CSIL records were the property of the networks, and so the Fourth Amendment did not apply because the “search” did not occur in respect of Carpenter’s own property. This judgment also called for a reassessment of the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test established in the Katz case and the application of that test to the concept of “search” in the Fourth Amendment. It added that the Katz case had impermissibly shifted the focus of the Fourth Amendment from property to privacy.
Justice Alito delivered a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Thomas, which stated that the order under the Stored Communications Act was not a search of Carpenter’s private records but only a request for a third party to look through theirs. It added that treating the obtaining of CSIL records as a search is “revolutionary” as it “violates both the original understanding of the Fourth Amendment and more than a century of Supreme Court precedent” [p. 1].
Justice Gorsuch delivered a dissenting opinion which called for a rejection of the Katz and Miller and Smith decisions and adoption of a new approach.
This judgment expands protections for privacy in the digital age and limits the capacity of law enforcement to utilize detailed cellphone location information in surveillance activities. It departs from previous applications of the Fourth Amendment by extending protection to records held by third parties that reveal extensive personal data on their private life or personal location information.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


D.C. Law Library - § 47–340.31. Payment and security.
↪ Subchapter II-D. Income Tax Secured Bonds.
↪ § 47–340.31. Payment and security.
§ 47–340.30. Issuance of the bonds.
§ 47–340.32. Financing and closing documents.
§ 47–340.31. Payment and security.
(a) The bonds shall be special obligations of the District payable solely from the Available Tax Revenues pledged therefor under this subchapter and other receipts, revenues, and funds in the Income Tax Secured Bond Fund and payable to the Income Tax Secured Bond Fund pursuant to this subchapter and the Financing Documents. The Available Tax Revenues shall constitute dedicated taxes and fees and available revenues within the meaning of § 1-204.90(n). As such, the holders of the bonds shall have a first lien on and pledge of the Available Tax Revenues superior to that of any other person, including holders of general obligation bonds or notes secured by the full faith and credit of the District pursuant to § 1-204.82.
(b) The bonds shall be without recourse to the District, are not a pledge of, and do not involve, the faith and credit or the taxing power of the District (other than the Available Tax Revenues and any other taxes and fees allocated to the Income Tax Secured Bond Fund), do not constitute a debt of the District, and do not constitute lending of the public credit for private undertakings as prohibited in § 1-206.02(a)(2). The bonds shall contain a legend expressly setting forth the limitations set forth in the preceding sentence.
(c) Payment of the bonds shall be secured as provided in the Financing Documents and by an assignment by the District for the benefit of the bond owners of certain of its rights under the Financing Documents and Closing Documents to the Collection Agent and trustee pursuant to the Financing Documents.
(d) The Collection Agent and trustee, respectively, may deposit, invest, and disburse the Available Tax Revenues received pursuant to the Financing Documents.
(e) The trustee may disburse the proceeds of the bonds to the District.
This section is referenced in § 47-340.28.


text:
Donald Barnhart has been developing optical design and analysis software in Mathematica since 1991. His Optica software package, introduced in 1994, is used by thousands of scientists across the world. Donald developed the world's first successful high-resolution holographic instrument to measure three-dimensional velocity fields in fluids, the results of which appeared on the front cover of Applied Optics in 1994 and are cited in over 200 publications. Donald received the Rank Prize in 2001 for the best electro-optics Ph.D. dissertation in the United Kingdom. The optics group to which he belonged at Loughborough University received the Queen's Anniversary Prize, awarded personally by the Queen at Buckingham Palace. Since 2004 Donald has been the chief optical scientist for iCyt Mission Technology, a Sony USA subsidiary that produces flow cytometers for stem cell and cancer research, in addition to his ongoing Optica business.
a research and development company with Optica Software as a division.
1994 World's first successful holographic velocimetry measurement presented on front cover of Applied Optics journal.
As the lead developer of Optica Software, I am continually developing this software as a consultant for new business applications in a wide range of professional settings involving optical systems design and modeling.
digital holographic microscope for high-resolution, volumetric imaging.
A third interest is the development of new optical instrumentation for remote sensing. This interest is connected with a personal endeavor to restore more than 100 acres of farmland into native tall grass prairie (see below). Although my experience in this research area is still limited, I wish to develop new instrumentation for mapping out species distributions in high-diversity, natural plant communities, such as the tall grass prairie, on a spatial scale that enables the individual plants to be accurately located, identified, and cataloged. In addition, the same instrumentation can have applications in commercial agriculture, for which research/business funding is more abundantly available.
Techniques in high resolution, three-dimensional shape measurement.
(1) Barnhart, D. H. 2001, Whole-field holographic measurements of three-dimensional displacement in solid and fluid mechanics, Ph.D. Thesis, Loughborough University, UK.
(2) Barnhart, D. H. 1994, Phase Conjugate Holographic System for High Resolution Particle Image Velocimetry, M. S. Thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
(3) Barnhart, D. H., Adrian, R. J. and Papen, G. C. Stereo multiplexed holographic particle image velocimeter United States Patent, 1996, August 20, Patent Number 5,548,419.
(7) Barnhart, D. H., New software tools facililtate the development of better holographic systems, Holography, Newsletter of SPIE's International Technical Group on Holography, June issue, vol 16, No 1, 2005.
(8) Barnhart, D. H., Koek, W. D., Juchem, T. , Hampp, N. A., Coupland, J. M. , and Halliwell, N. A., Bacteriorhodopsin (BR) as a high-resolution, high-capacity buffer for digital holographic measurements, March 19 2004, Meas. Sci. Technol., vol 15, pp 639-646, (2004).
(9) Chan, V. S.S., Koek, W. D., Barnhart, D. H., Juchem, T. , Hampp, N. A., Coupland, J. M. , and Halliwell, N. A., “Application of holography to fluid flow measurements using bacteriorhodopsin (bR).”, Meas. Sci. Technol., vol 15, pp 647-655, (2004).
(10) Barnhart, D. H., Halliwell, N. A., Coupland, J. M. Holographic velocimetry with Object Conjugate Reconstruction (OCR): Simultaneous velocity mapping in fluid and solid mechanics, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, (submitted in 2003).
(11) Barnhart, D. H., Chan, V. S. S., Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. Holographic velocimetry using object-conjugate reconstruction (OCR): a new approach for simultaneous, 3-D displacement measurement in fluid and solid mechanics, Experiments in Fluids, 2002, vol 33, pp 770 - 780.
(12) Barnhart, D. H., Halliwell, N. A., Coupland, J. M. Object Conjugate Reconstruction (OCR): A step forward in holographic metrology, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Jun 17 2002, vol 458, pp 2083-2097.
(13) Barnhart, D. H., Holographic velocimetry, Holography, SPIE's International Technical Group Newsletter, vol 12, No 2, 2001.
(14) Barnhart, D. H., Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. Holographic particle image velocimetry: cross-correlation analysis using a conjugate reconstruction geometry, Optics and Laser Technology, 2000, vol 32, pp 527-533.
(15) Barnhart,D. H., Adrian, R. J. and Papen, G. C. Phase-conjugate holographic system for high-resolution particle-image velocimetry, Applied Optics, 1994, October 20, vol 33, no 30, pp 7159-7170.
(22) Barnhart D (2007), ”Holographic measurement with application to flow-cytometry”, International Workshop on Digital Holographic Reconstruction and Optical Tomography for Engineering Applications, Loughborough, England, April 24.
(24) Barnhart, D. Holographic measurement with application to flow-cytometry, Proceedings for the International Workshop on Digital Holographic Reconstruction and Optical Tomography for Engineering Applications, April 2007, Loughborough, England.
(25) Chan VSS, Koek, WD, Barnhart, DH, Poelma, C, Ooms, TA, Bhattacharya, N, Braat, JJM, and Westerweel J., HPIV using Polarization Multiplexing Holography in Bacteriorhodopsin (bR), 13th International Symposium on Applications of Laser Techniques to Fluid Mechanics, July 2004, Lisbon, Portugal.
(26) Koek, W.D., Barnhart, D, Chan, V.S.S., Bhattacharya, N., Westerweel, J., and Braat, J. J. M., “HPIV using polarization multiplexing holography in bacteriorhodopsin (bR)”, 21st International congress of theoretical and applied mechanics, (Warsaw, Poland, 2004), paper FM10L_11899.
(27) Koek, W.D., Barnhart, D, Chan, V.S.S., Bhattacharya, Juchem, T., Hampp, N. , Westerweel, J., and Braat, J. J. M., “Wavelength Shifted Reconstruction with Bacteriorhodopsin for Holographic Particle Image Velocimetry,” in Organic Holographic Materials and Applications, K. Meerholz, Ed., Proc. SPIE 5216, 147-155 (2003).
(28) Barnhart, D. H., Hampp, N., Halliwell, N. A., and Coupland, J. M. Digital holographic velocimetry with bacteriorhodopsin (BR) for real-time recording and numeric reconstruction, 11th International Symposium on Applications of Laser Techniques to Fluid Mechanics, July 2002, Lisbon, Portugal.
(29) Chan, V. S. S., Barnhart, D. H., Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. Unified system for holographic measurement in fluid and solid mechanics: use of the system for 3D velocity measurement in fluids through a thick curved window, SPIE Proceedings Vol. 3783, 1999, October, pp 14-22.
(30) Chan, V. S. S., Barnhart, D. H., Garner, C. P., Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. Unified system for holographic measurement in fluid and solid mechanics: application of the system to volumetric flow measurement in an internal combustion engine, SPIE Proceedings Vol. 3783, 1999, October, pp 110-117.
(31) Barnhart, D. H., Chan, V. S. S., Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. A unified system for 3D holographic displacement and velocity measurements in fluid and solid mechanics: design and construction of the recording camera and interrogation assembly, SPIE paper No. 3783-17, 1999.
(32) Barnhart, D. H.,Chan, V. S. S , Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. A unified system for holographic measurement in fluid and solid mechanics: use of the system for 3D displacement measurement on surfaces, Proceedings of optical science engineering and instrumentation SPIE paper No. 3783-24, 1999.
(33) Barnhart, D. H., . Chan, V. S. S., Garner, C. P., Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. Volumetric three-dimensional flow measurement in IC engines using holographic recording and optical correlation analysis, IMechE Conference Transaction 1998-2, 1998, April 16-17, pp 51-61.
(34) Barnhart, D. H., Halliwell, N. A. and Coupland, J. M. Three-dimensional displacement measurements in fluid and solid mechanics: development of an optical processor, Presented at IMechE Conference, University of Reading, 1996, September.
(35) Barnhart,D. H., Adrian, R. J., Meinhart, C., and Papen, G. C., Phase-conjugate holographic system for high-resolution particle image velocimetry through thick-walled curved windows, Proceedings SPIE vol 2545, 1995, June, Interferometry VII: Applications, pp 321-332.
(36) Barnhart, D. H., Papen, G. C. and Adrian, R. J. Recent results of a phase-conjugate holographic system for high-resolution particle image holography, Proceedings SPIE Vol. 2333, 1995, February, Fifth International Symposium on Display Holography, pp 321-332.
(37) Adrian, R. J., Meinhart C. D., Barnhart D. H., and Papen, G. C. An HPIV system for turbulence research, FED-vol 148, Holographic Particle Image Velocimetry ASME, 1993, pp 17-21.
(38) Barnhart, D. H., Papen, G. C. and Adrian, R. J. Phase conjugate image reconstruction for HPIV systems, FED-vol 148, Holographic Particle Image Velocimetry ASME, 1993, pp 13-15.
(39) Barnhart, D. H., Papen, G. C. and Adrian, R. J. Holographic particle image velocimetry, Proceedings SPIE, vol 1600, 1992, January, International Symposium on Display Holography, pp 357-365.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


text:
Comment: Accident victim walking to his boat across a floating wooden dock owned and operated by defendant The Town of Oyster Bay tripped and fell and was injured. The Town moved to dismiss the case on summary judgment because of lack of "prior written notice." The appeals court, reversing the lower court, found that the Town's prior written notice rule must be "strictly" interpreted and, while it required prior written notice as to defects on any street, highway, bridge, culvert, sidewalk or crosswalk, the rule did not apply (and did not require prior written notice) to a defective floating wooden dock at a Town-owned and -operated marina.
So this case goes forward for a jury to decide.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCarty III, J.), entered March 18, 2010, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) a judgment of the same court entered July 16, 2010, which, upon the order, is in favor of the defendant and against him dismissing the complaint.
The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5501[c] ).
The plaintiff owned a boat that he docked at a marina owned, operated, and maintained by the defendant, Town of Oyster Bay. On August 21, 2006, the plaintiff allegedly was walking on a floating wooden dock at the marina to access his boat when he tripped and fell over a raised portion of the dock at slip 15. The plaintiff subsequently commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained as a result of the fall. The Supreme Court granted the Town's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. We reverse.
The Town failed to meet its prima facie burden of showing that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Contrary to the Town's contention and the conclusion of the Supreme Court, the action is not subject to dismissal on the ground that the Town lacked prior written notice of the alleged defective condition. Prior written notice laws are in derogation of the common law and must be strictly construed (see Gorman v. Town of Huntington, 12 N.Y.3d 275, 279, 879 N.Y.S.2d 379, 907 N.E.2d 292; Selca v. City of Peekskill, 78 A.D.3d 1160, 1161, 912 N.Y.S.2d 287). Here, the location of the accident does not fall within the ambit of the Town's prior written notice statute, which applies to alleged defects on any "street, highway, bridge, culvert, sidewalk or crosswalk" (Code of Town of Oyster Bay Sec. 160-1[A]; see Selca v. City of Peekskill, 78 A.D.3d at 1161, 912 N.Y.S.2d 287; cf. Englehardt v. Town of Hempstead, 141 A.D.2d 601, 602, 529 N.Y.S.2d 523).
Also contrary to the Town's contention and the conclusion of the Supreme Court, the Town failed to make a prima facie showing that it did not create or have actual or constructive notice of the alleged defective condition (see Villano v. Strathmore Terrace Homeowners Assn., Inc., 76 A.D.3d 1061, 908 N.Y.S.2d 124; Molloy v. Waldbaum, Inc., 72 A.D.3d 659, 659-660, 897 N.Y.S.2d 653; Gradwohl v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., LLC, 70 A.D.3d 634, 636, 896 N.Y.S.2d 85). In support of its motion, the Town submitted the deposition testimony of Salvatore Cornicelli, the manager of the marina at the time the accident occurred. During Cornicelli's testimony, it was elicited that, in June 2006, notations were made in the marina's boat check inspection reports indicating that there was a raised board at slip 14 and slip 15. Cornicelli testified, when questioned about these notations, that this meant that there were one or two raised boards that needed replacing in the area.
Finally, contrary to the Town's contention, the evidence submitted by the Town, including photographs and the plaintiff's deposition testimony, was insufficient to demonstrate, prima facie, that the alleged defect was trivial and, therefore, not actionable (see Trincere v. County of Suffolk, 90 N.Y.2d 976, 977, 665 N.Y.S.2d 615, 688 N.E.2d 489; Araujo v. City of New York, 84 A.D.3d 993, 994, 922 N.Y.S.2d 806; Bolloli v. Waldbaum, Inc., 71 A.D.3d 618, 619, 896 N.Y.S.2d 400).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the Town's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, regardless of the sufficiency of the plaintiff's papers in opposition (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572).

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.