WaPo: She installed a Ring camera in her children’s room for ‘peace of mind.’ A hacker accessed it and harassed her 8-year-old daughter. By Allyson Chiu (“Several Ring users nationwide have reported that their security systems were also infiltrated by hackers who harassed them through the camera’s two-way talk function.”)
Ring is owned by Amazon. Think of the potential liability.
This is a Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim. “The district court, upon a close analysis of the elements of the crimes alleged, determined that the facts proffered by Detective Brashears are insufficient to establish probable cause, or even arguable probable cause, to arrest the Pierces. Accordingly, the district court denied him qualified immunity on the Pierces’ constitutional claims. Based upon our review of the record, we agree with the district court’s well-reasoned order and affirm the denial of qualified immunity to Detective Brashears on the Pierces’ claim of malicious prosecution.” Pierce v. Clayton County, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36497 (11th Cir. Dec. 10, 2019).*
A furtive movement and a “conspicuously raised floormat” were reasonable suspicion. United States v. McGheeUnited States v. McGheeUnited States v. McGhee, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36505 (8th Cir. Dec. 10, 2019).*
The state showed a nexus to defendant’s cell phone and the crime under investigation because the participants were coordinating with each other before hand. “We have no evidence that the purpose of the cell phone call between the defendant, when he was arrested, and his girlfriend was to cover up the crime, as the Commonwealth contends. However, we need no such evidence. ‘[T]he fact that police did not know to a certainty that [the coventurer] was using his cellular telephone to communicate regarding the crime under investigation is not dispositive as to the question of nexus. Holley, 478 Mass. at 526-527.” Commonwealth v. Snow, 2019 Mass. App. LEXIS 172 (Dec. 10, 2019).
Wearing vests with “POLICE” on them and yelling at defendant “Police; stop!” was a seizure, and here it was completely without probable cause or reasonable suspicion even crediting every word of their testimony. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Sears, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212175 (D. N.J. Dec. 10, 2019).*
NBC News: The FBI’s warrant system for spying on Americans is a mess, the IG report shows by Ken Dilanian (“Analysis: The report found an FBI process so rife with errors that the bureau’s director immediately issued a statement saying he would begin reforms.”)
Reason: The FBI Will Be Audited to See How Frequently They Screw Up Other FISA Warrants by Scott Shackford (“Was what happened with Carter Page an anomaly or does the agency regularly leave out important information?”)
Vox: How to avoid a dystopian future of facial recognition in law enforcement y Shirin Ghaffary (“The future of police surveillance doesn’t have to be scary. But government and citizens need to step up.”)
Vox: What facial recognition steals from us by Josh Foss (“A video explainer on the technology that’s changing the meaning of the human face.”)
recode: What facial recognition steals from us by Joss Fong (“A video explainer on the technology that’s changing the meaning of the human face.”)
Creators.com: What’s Wrong with FISA? by Andrew P. Napolitano:
Continue reading
EFF: Genetic Genealogy Company GEDmatch Acquired by Company With Ties to FBI & Law Enforcement—Why You Should Be Worried by Jennifer Lynch:
Continue reading
There was probable cause defendant was a major player in a DTO, and that his participation went on for months. This, he concedes, undermines his staleness argument. United States v. Williams, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211403 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 6, 2019).*
A verdict for plaintiffs against a social worker for unreasonably ordering children taken from the parents is affirmed, as is the $499,000 attorneys fee. Lewis v. County of San Diego, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36421 (9th Cir. Dec. 9, 2019).*
This search of a person on supervised release was with reasonable suspicion of a violation of terms of release as well as more specific information he might be armed. The search was reasonable on its justification and scope. United States v. Stigler, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211717 (S.D. Iowa Nov. 1, 2019).*
When officers came to the door with probable cause for the presence of marijuana, defendant’s shutting the door and moving about inside for up to 90 seconds created apprehension that he was destroying evidence. Also, there was at least reasonable suspicion someone else was inside for a protective sweep. United States v. Harris, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211633 (E.D. N.C. Dec. 9, 2019).
Defendant was a passenger in the car that was searched. He claimed an ownership interest in helping make payments, paying for maintenance, and having a key. He did not, however, have his name on the title. Without more corroboration from the registered owner, the court doesn’t credit him as having standing. United States v. Johnson, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211503 (M.D. La. Dec. 9, 2019).*
Defendant allegedly had a motive to be violent, and, when officers asked him about whether he was armed, he dodged the question. The evidence supports the district court’s conclusion that there was reasonable suspicion for the intrusion. United States v. Farrington, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36384 (6th Cir. Dec. 6, 2019).
Defendant succeeds in reversing district court’s denial of 2255 on the grounds that he was misadvised as to the Guideline range and that a conditional plea here cost him acceptance of responsibility. He gets to re-enter an unconditional plea on remand if that’s his choice. Medina v. United States, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36370 (11th Cir. Dec. 9, 2019).*
“When Officer Hill entered Gates’s home, he held the reasonable belief that a violent domestic disturbance was ongoing, and that a woman was present in the residence and involved in the disturbance. This gave rise to a reasonable belief in a present emergency, justifying his warrantless entry. Once inside, Officer Hill held a warrant for Gates’s arrest. … Officer Hills’s search of Gates’s person, leading to the discovery the firearm, was appropriate under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 224, 94 S. Ct. 467, 38 L. Ed. 2d 427 (1973) (‘It is well settled that a search incident to a lawful arrest is a traditional exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.’).” United States v. Gates, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210993 (W.D. Va. Dec. 6, 2019).
ABA Journal Web 100, Best Law Blogs (2017); ABA Journal Blawg 100 (2015-16)
by John Wesley Hall
Criminal Defense Lawyer and
Search and seizure law consultant
Little Rock, Arkansas
Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book
www.johnwesleyhall.com
© 2003-19,
online since Feb. 24, 2003
WebPage Visits: real non-robot hits since 2010; approx. 25k posts since 2003
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fourth Amendment cases,
citations, and links
Latest Slip Opinions:
U.S. Supreme Court (Home)
Federal Appellate Courts Opinions
First Circuit
Second Circuit
Third Circuit
Fourth
Circuit
Fifth Circuit
Sixth Circuit
Seventh
Circuit
Eighth Circuit
Ninth Circuit
Tenth Circuit
Eleventh
Circuit
D.C.
Circuit
Federal Circuit
Foreign Intell.Surv.Ct.
FDsys, many district courts, other federal courts
Military Courts: C.A.A.F., Army, AF,
N-M, CG, SF
State courts (and
some USDC opinions)
Google Scholar
Advanced Google Scholar
Google search tips
LexisWeb
LII State Appellate Courts
LexisONE free caselaw
Findlaw Free Opinions
To
search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $
Research Links:
Supreme Court:
SCOTUSBlog
S. Ct.
Docket
Solicitor General's
site
SCOTUSreport
Briefs
online (but no amicus briefs)
Oyez
Project (NWU)
"On the Docket"–Medill
S.Ct.
Monitor: Law.com
S.Ct.
Com't'ry: Law.com
General (many free):
LexisWeb
Google Scholar | Google
LexisOne
Legal Website Directory
Crimelynx
Lexis.com
$
Lexis.com
(criminal law/ 4th Amd) $
Findlaw.com
Findlaw.com (4th
Amd)
Westlaw.com
$
F.R.Crim.P.
41
www.fd.org
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Resources
FBI
Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (2008) (pdf)
DEA
Agents Manual (2002) (download)
DOJ
Computer Search Manual (2009) (pdf)
Stringrays (ACLU No. Cal.) (pdf)
Congressional Research Service:
--Electronic
Communications Privacy Act (2012)
--Overview
of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012)
--Outline
of Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012)
--Federal
Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012)
--Federal
Laws Relating to Cybersecurity: Discussion of Proposed Revisions (2012)
ACLU on privacy
Privacy
Foundation
Electronic Frontier Foundation
NACDL’s Domestic Drone Information Center
Electronic Privacy
Information Center
Criminal
Appeal (post-conviction) (9th Cir.)
Section 1983 Blog
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't."
—Me
“I am still learning.”
—Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays
down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its
application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect
results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at
bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping
government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having
and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that
the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and
safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced."
—Williams
v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold,
J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing
can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws,
or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence."
—Mapp
v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that
bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the
police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater
than it is today."
— Terry
v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their
property."
—Entick
v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have
frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And
so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his
case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth
Amendment."
—United
States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated
here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth."
—Chapman
v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the
bottom of a turntable."
—Arizona
v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly
exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth
Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in
an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."
—Katz
v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to
protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born
to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded
rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men
of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
—United
States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted
intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by
government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose
it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.”
—United
States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want /
But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need."
—Mick Jagger & Keith Richards
"In Germany, they first came for the communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for
the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came
for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration
camp]
“You know, most men would get discouraged by
now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!”
---Pepé Le Pew
