NJ.com: Murphy vetoes bills requiring cops to use body cameras, citing cost and privacy concerns

NJ.com: Murphy vetoes bills requiring cops to use body cameras, citing cost and privacy concerns by Blake Nelson (“Gov. Phil Murphy says he won’t sign two bills expanding the use of police body cameras unless lawmakers made several changes.”)

Posted in Body cameras | Comments Off on NJ.com: Murphy vetoes bills requiring cops to use body cameras, citing cost and privacy concerns

N.D.Ohio: Giving a drug courier a duffel bag doesn’t allow one to retain standing under a bailment or joint possession theory

Defendant did not have standing under either a bailment theory or joint possession where a drug courier allegedly hauling his meth on a Greyhound bus had the bag unreasonably seized and searched. Defendant wasn’t there observing the courier holding his bag; he was 800 miles away. United States v. Hayward, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192932 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 19, 2020):

Continue reading
Posted in Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Giving a drug courier a duffel bag doesn’t allow one to retain standing under a bailment or joint possession theory

CA7: Ptf was a trespasser who had no REP

Plaintiff as a trespasser had no reasonable expectation of privacy to make a Fourth Amendment complaint. “Just as a trespasser has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the property, a trespasser also lacks a possessory interest in the property. The very definition of ‘trespass,’ after all, is the interference of another’s possessory interest.” “Even if Dix alleged that there was a Fourth Amendment ‘seizure,’ to ‘state a constitutional violation,’ he must also allege that ‘the seizure … was “unreasonable.”’ … Case law compels our next conclusion: that even if a seizure occurred here, it was reasonable.” Dix v. Edelman Fin. Servs., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 32883 (7th Cir. Oct. 19, 2020).

2255 petitioner’s claim defense counsel was deficient in failing to investigate a Franks challenge fails on the merits of that challenge. Sims v. United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192882 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 19, 2020).*

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing | Comments Off on CA7: Ptf was a trespasser who had no REP

CA1: Gunshot from within while waiting for SW justified entry and sweep

Police froze and surrounded defendant’s home while they sought a search warrant. While they were waiting, a gunshot came from within, so they entered in response. The government satisfied inevitable discovery even though this protective sweep ended up in the ultimate warrant request. United States v. Soto-Peguero, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 32885 (1st Cir. Oct. 19, 2020).

Omission of witness recantation and the lack of physical evidence connecting plaintiff to the alleged crimes under investigation led to the affidavit for the search and arrest warrant to lack all probable cause. Motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity denied. Wheeler v. City of Searcy, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192869 (E.D. Ark. Oct. 19, 2020).*

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Franks doctrine, Protective sweep, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA1: Gunshot from within while waiting for SW justified entry and sweep

D.D.C.: Search of def’s fanny pack wasn’t valid as search incident, but it was valid because he disclaimed it

Defendant’s front license plate being on the dashboard and not affixed to the car was a traffic offense that justified his stop. “Perhaps Giles recognizes that there was probable cause to arrest him after he refused to pull over and fled his car without putting it into park. The Government says these facts establish probable cause that Giles committed reckless driving, a criminal offense in the District of Columbia.” The search incident of his fanny pack when he was arrested was not reasonable because he was across the street from it. The government’s alternative basis of abandonment, however, makes it reasonable because defendant denied the fanny pack was his. He can’t argue that his abandonment was caused by the officers. United States v. Giles, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192690 (D.D.C. Oct. 19, 2020).

There was reasonable suspicion and even probable cause for defendant’s stop, and reasonable suspicion was arguably conceded by him. Considering the officers’ knowledge of his criminal history and propensity for violence, it was not unreasonable for them to draw weapons on him. United States v. Gaderson, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 32841 (5th Cir. Oct. 13, 2020).*

Posted in Abandonment, Search incident, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on D.D.C.: Search of def’s fanny pack wasn’t valid as search incident, but it was valid because he disclaimed it

SCOTUS cert. grant: Does hot pursuit apply to misdemeanant’s flight into own home?

Lange v. California, 20-18 (granted Oct. 19, 2020):

Issue: Whether the pursuit of a person whom a police officer has probable cause to believe has committed a misdemeanor categorically qualifies as an exigent circumstance sufficient to allow the officer to enter a home without a warrant.

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Hot pursuit | Comments Off on SCOTUS cert. grant: Does hot pursuit apply to misdemeanant’s flight into own home?

SCOTUS: three dissent from denial of cert.: Jardines requires reversal

Bovat v. Vermont, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 5057 (Oct. 19, 2020) (Gorsuch dissenting from denial of certiorari with Sotomayor and Kagan):

Continue reading
Posted in Curtilage, SCOTUS | Comments Off on SCOTUS: three dissent from denial of cert.: Jardines requires reversal

GA: Where state constitution or statute are recognized to be susceptible to a broader interpretation than the 4A, appellant has to show why or how; otherwise, it’s waived

Defendant also relies on the state constitution as well as statute in addition to the Fourth Amendment. “However, Hinkson makes no argument that state law provides a rule substantively different as applied to this case from that of the Fourth Amendment. This case therefore presents no occasion for consideration of whether [the state constitution] differs from the Fourth Amendment in some circumstances. See Olevik v. State, 302 Ga. 228, 234 (2) (b) n.3 (806 SE2d 505) (2017) (noting that the United States Supreme Court’s construction of the Fourth Amendment does not bind our construction of Paragraph XIII, and that any independent interpretation of Paragraph XIII must be grounded in the text, context, and history of the Georgia provision).” Hinkson v. State, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 753 (Oct. 19, 2020).

A search warrant for defendant’s vehicle was not stale where it was issued two days after the vehicle was in impound and the police believed defendant drove it from the scene of the murder. It was highly likely evidence of the murder would still be there. Rawls v. State, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 754 (Oct. 19, 2020).*

Defendant filed a motion to suppress the search of his cell phone, but it was never pursued before trial. It is thus subject to plain error review, and, on this record, any error isn’t plain. Goins v. State, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 745 (Oct. 19, 2020).*

Posted in Staleness, State constitution | Comments Off on GA: Where state constitution or statute are recognized to be susceptible to a broader interpretation than the 4A, appellant has to show why or how; otherwise, it’s waived

CT: Pretrial GPS monitoring didn’t violate right to counsel and is 4A reasonable

Pretrial GPS monitoring that can tell when the accused is at his attorney’s office doesn’t violate the right to counsel, and it’s reasonable when merely monitoring whether defendant is abiding by her pretrial travel restrictions. State v. Troconis, 2020 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1057 (Sept. 23, 2020):

Continue reading
Posted in GPS / Tracking Data, Privileges | Comments Off on CT: Pretrial GPS monitoring didn’t violate right to counsel and is 4A reasonable

AP: Baltimore prosecutor: Do not authorize “no knock” warrants

AP: Baltimore prosecutor: Do not authorize “no knock” warrants (“Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby has directed prosecutors in her office to not authorize ‘no knock’ arrest warrants that are approved by judges, citing the police shooting death of Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Kentucky.”)

Posted in Knock and announce | Comments Off on AP: Baltimore prosecutor: Do not authorize “no knock” warrants

N.D.Ala.: Def failed to prove he was an overnight guest with standing

Defendant lacked standing where he purported to be an overnight guest, but the host said no. United States v. Spencer, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191102 (N.D. Ala. Sept. 4, 2020), adopted, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190308 (N.D. Ala. Oct. 14, 2020).

The police received an anonymous tip of erratic driving on I-84, and the officer found the vehicle and tailed it, observing the same things. This was probable cause [not just reasonable suspicion] for a stop. State v. Byrum, 2020 Ida. App. LEXIS 76 (Oct. 15, 2020).*

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: Def failed to prove he was an overnight guest with standing

D.S.D.: Issuing magistrate shown not to be neutral and detached in issuing SW wholly lacking in PC

A tribal judge was not a neutral and detached magistrate, and the good faith exception did not apply. The application for the search warrant was technically deficient in both form (lacking a prosecutor’s signature) and substance (completely lacking probable cause), and the magistrate admitted that no application for a search warrant had ever been rejected or sent back for more information. And, it did, in fact, lack probable cause, and it was so lacking in showing a connection to defendant’s home that the good faith exception did not apply. The officer couldn’t even link drugs found to defendant, let alone to defendant’s property. United States v. Rodriguez, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192070 (D. S.D. Oct. 15, 2020).

There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s parole search of his vehicle. United States v. Harden, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191843 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 16, 2020).*

Posted in Good faith exception, Neutral and detached magistrate, Nexus, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.S.D.: Issuing magistrate shown not to be neutral and detached in issuing SW wholly lacking in PC

N.D.Ga.: Reissuance of a better SW to Google after a motion to suppress wasn’t unreasonable

As to one challenged search of Google, when the government says it won’t use challenged evidence at trial, the motion to suppress becomes moot. A motion to suppress another search warrant to Google led to reissuance of a search warrant and that was not unreasonable. United States v. Beck, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191678 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 16, 2020).

Defendant’s Franks challenge fails. “The disputed ‘focal point’ language isn’t necessary to the probable-cause finding here because stripping that language from the affidavit leaves a finding that comfortably rests on at least the following facts that are not in dispute for purposes of the motion to suppress: ….” Defendant requested an AT&T service call at this house, and the service tech saw thumbnails of child pornography on his computer screen. United States v. Zappe, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191122 (W.D. Tex. Oct. 15, 2020).*

Posted in Franks doctrine, Independent source, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Reissuance of a better SW to Google after a motion to suppress wasn’t unreasonable

AR: Video of arrest wasn’t claimed below to be a const’l claim, so it’s waived

Defendant sought to suppress the video of his arrest where he held a knife to his throat but he cited nothing for the Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendment, but he did cite Rule 403. The state argued it was evidence of consciousness of guilt. The trial court’s denial was not an abuse of discretion as to 403, and the constitutional claims on the arrest won’t be considered for failure to present below. McKee v. State, 2020 Ark. 327 (Oct. 15, 2020):

Continue reading
Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Arrest or entry on arrest, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Video of arrest wasn’t claimed below to be a const’l claim, so it’s waived

S.D.N.Y.: ShotSpotter alert from a rooftop led to encounter then RS

A ShotSpotter report was specific as to a shot coming from a rooftop in the Bronx. That house was the subject of many police calls. This led to defendants being encountered by officers who discussed with them what was going on, and it led to a frisk. The report and then the encounter led to a frisk with reasonable suspicion. United States v. Diaz, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191250 (S.D. N.Y. Oct. 14, 2020).

Petitioner won an appeal and got a remand of his Fourth Amendment claim, but the remand didn’t go well for him. Still, he had a “full and fair opportunity” to litigate his Fourth Amendment claim in the state courts. Clay v. Lawrence, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191207 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2020).*

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: ShotSpotter alert from a rooftop led to encounter then RS

S.D.N.Y. follows majority and holds that a cell phone search starts with “seizure of the media”

The government had possession of defendant’s cell phone and technically started the search within the time limits of Rule 41(e)(2)(B) by “seizure of the media.” The extraction report followed up months later. United States v. Estime, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191242 (S.D. N.Y. Oct. 14, 2020):

Continue reading
Posted in Cell phones, Warrant execution | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y. follows majority and holds that a cell phone search starts with “seizure of the media”