Texas added a fifth requirement to search warrants that the issuing magistrate’s name be clearly legible. It can be incorporated from the affidavit. Here it wasn’t, and the motion to suppress was properly granted and no good faith exception applies. State v. Arellano, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 1223 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi – Edinburg Feb. 21, 2019).
One officer saw what he believed was a hand-to-hand drug transaction, and he passed it on to another officer. That satisfied the collective knowledge doctrine. State v. Preston, 2019 Ga. App. LEXIS 67 (Feb. 19, 2019).*
A reserve deputy followed defendant who was driving badly and then she ran into a car in her driveway. He stopped behind her and told her to “hang tight,” and he called for a deputy. The stop was reasonable, considering it was a minor intrusion on defendant’s rights. State v. Wright, 2019 N.M. App. LEXIS 7 (Feb. 14, 2019):
“Similarly, in this case, Charles Williams was discovered with a large amount of narcotics immediately after leaving the Target Apartment. … This incident alone is enough to establish a nexus to the Apartment to justify a warrant to search the Apartment.” United States v. Watts, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25672 (W.D. Ky. Feb. 19, 2019).
Defendant’s weaving in his lane was reasonable suspicion for stop of his car. State v. Lobo, 2019 Iowa App. LEXIS 185 (Feb. 20, 2019).*
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging a search that would have lost. Saul v. State, 2019 Iowa App. LEXIS 193 (Feb. 20, 2019).*
Defendant proved ineffective assistance of counsel from defense counsel’s failure to object to the search warrant application coming into evidence full of informant hearsay that wasn’t admissible in the case in chief. People v. Newman, 2019 NY Slip Op 01263, 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1302 (3d Dept. Feb. 21, 2019) [Not to mention the DA arguing it when he or she should have seen this coming. Admittedly, unobjected to hearsay is “evidence,” but the DA should have played it closer to the vest and mitigated the mistakes of defense counsel to avoid this.]:
Defendant was subjected to a command authorized search under Mil.R.Evid. 315(d). He argues that the definition of who is in control to authorize the search isn’t clear. Well, it isn’t, but that doesn’t mean that multiple people might not fit the definition. In any event, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Seerden, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 4891 (4th Cir. Feb. 20, 2019):
Excising that which was allegedly illegally obtained from the affidavit for this search warrant, probable cause still remains. United States v. Fleur, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 4899 (11th Cir. Feb. 20, 2019).
There was no independent probable cause for the juvenile’s arrest because the information the police were relying on was innocuous, and there was no attenuation. In re K.M., 2019 IL App (1st) 172322, 2019 Ill. App. LEXIS 88 (Feb. 20, 2019).*
The trial court properly applied a reasonable suspicion standard for whether a backpack found during a probation search belonged to the probationer. The argument was over whether it was to be a reasonable belief or reasonable suspicion. State v. Garnett, 2019 Ida. LEXIS 32 (Feb. 20, 2019).*
Waymack is a doctor in the U.S. who also has business in Israel. Israel sought assistance from the SEC under an international MOU for a securities investigation there. Waymack has a Fifth Amendment privilege to not provide information in the U.S. and that can’t be used against him here, but it can be under Israeli law. The court concludes that the SEC’s subpoena here is overbroad as to emails because, as written, if requires production of a huge number of emails. The SEC is ordered to redraft the subpoena to narrow it. United States SEC v. Waymack, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25507 (D.D.C. Feb. 19, 2019).*
Defendant doesn’t get discovery on whether Torrent Downpour software used in child pornography searches and investigations is flawed. United States v. Gonzales, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26061 (D. Ariz. Feb. 19, 2019).*