Author Archives: Hall

Stone v. Powell decided 50 years ago today

Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976), barring habeas review of Fourth Amendment claims was decided 50 years ago today.

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on Stone v. Powell decided 50 years ago today

TX1: Defendant had no REP in a package of drugs he never possessed and on another person

Defendant lacked standing to suppress 4,100 grams of ketamine seized from Brown because he never possessed the package, had no reasonable expectation of privacy in package of drugs carried by Brown, and the ketamine was recovered away from him during … Continue reading →

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing | Comments Off on TX1: Defendant had no REP in a package of drugs he never possessed and on another person

DC: Officers were a good ways away from def when he fled without any apparent reason

“We now hold that the officers had the requisite reasonable articulable suspicion to justify their seizure of D.W. when they grabbed his leg. We reach that conclusion largely because D.W. ran upon the mere sight of police officers approaching from … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on DC: Officers were a good ways away from def when he fled without any apparent reason

Cell phone GPS: WaPo: This little blue dot on your phone is a revolutionary invention

WaPo: This little blue dot on your phone is a revolutionary invention by Katherine Dunn (“U.S. policy used to jam up GPS. Now, those signals beam into your pocket.”):

Posted in Cell phones, GPS / Tracking Data | Comments Off on Cell phone GPS: WaPo: This little blue dot on your phone is a revolutionary invention

D.S.D.: No RS on totality when drug dog called for

The USMJ found that the officers abandoned the mission of the traffic stop (for Rodriguez purposes) when they called for the drug dog. So, the question is then whether there was reasonable suspicion at that point, and the answer is … Continue reading →

Posted in Dog sniff, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.S.D.: No RS on totality when drug dog called for

Cal.4: State’s argument of exigency for DUI blood draw boiled down to “there’s always exigency”

“Ultimately, Mitchell’s references to ‘rival priorities,’ ‘more pressing needs,’ and ‘other pressing duties’ of police officers (588 U.S. at p. 856; see id. at pp. 840, 851), must be understood in the context of the opinion’s focus on an officer … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Cal.4: State’s argument of exigency for DUI blood draw boiled down to “there’s always exigency”

SC: Police didn’t need a SW to access def’s bondsman’s GPS monitoring of him because he agreed to GPS monitoring for release

Defendant submitted to GPS monitoring by his bondsman as a condition of bail, and the police could call the bondsman for the GPS information to connect defendant to a new crime without a warrant. State v. Eberhart, 2026 S.C. App. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Private search, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on SC: Police didn’t need a SW to access def’s bondsman’s GPS monitoring of him because he agreed to GPS monitoring for release

N.D.Ga.: Standing has to be shown for the time of the search, not at some time in the past

“Earl was required to show, not that he had an expectation of privacy in the home at some time, but that he had that expectation at the time of the search. United States v. Brazel, 102 F.3d 1120, 1148 (11th … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Standing has to be shown for the time of the search, not at some time in the past

Fed.Cir.: VA’s determination here for mandatory in-home reassessment visits did not violate 4A under Wyman v. James

The VA’s determination here for mandatory in-home reassessment visits did not violate the Fourth Amendment under Wyman v. James. The statute gives the VA that discretion. Latham v. Sec’y of Veterans Affairs, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 17328 (Fed. Cir. June … Continue reading →

Posted in Administrative search, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness, Standing | Comments Off on Fed.Cir.: VA’s determination here for mandatory in-home reassessment visits did not violate 4A under Wyman v. James

E.D.Mich.: Full forensic search of a def’s university computer violated particularity and became a general warrant

The motion to suppress the search of devices for lack of particularity is granted, but the cloud search is not. Defendant is accused of hacking into student accounts on the University of Michigan’s computer system. The IT policy says that … Continue reading →

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, General warrant | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Full forensic search of a def’s university computer violated particularity and became a general warrant

E.D.N.Y.: Cell phone tower dump was with GF; issue left open by Carpenter

A tower dump warrant is an issue left open in Carpenter, 585 U.S. at 316, and the police effort here was valid under the good faith exception. United States v. Campbell, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146360 (E.D.N.Y. June 30, 2026):

Posted in Cell site location information, Good faith exception | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Cell phone tower dump was with GF; issue left open by Carpenter

OH6: RS not needed for dog sniff of car on curtilage during SW execution on house

Officers had a warrant for defendant’s house, and they didn’t need reasonable suspicion for a drug dog sniff of his car parked in the driveway. State v. Desarro, 2026-Ohio-1672, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 1692 (6th Dist. May 7, 2026).* “We … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on OH6: RS not needed for dog sniff of car on curtilage during SW execution on house

CA11: Yahoo not a govt actor in scanning emails for CSAM

Yahoo and NCMEC didn’t act as government agents when they scanned defendant’s email account for hash values of CSAM. They were not required to do so, but did so and warned customers they would. NCMEC passed on the information to … Continue reading →

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on CA11: Yahoo not a govt actor in scanning emails for CSAM

Treatise 25% off through 7/8

go here.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Treatise 25% off through 7/8

SCOTUS: Geofence warrants governed by Carpenter and are a search; remanded for resolution of issues (interesting take on third party doctrine, too)

A geofence warrant is a search because it captures location data. The mere collection of private data on the phone is not intended to be shared with third parties; essentially, a cell phone user has no control over that at … Continue reading →

Posted in geofence | Comments Off on SCOTUS: Geofence warrants governed by Carpenter and are a search; remanded for resolution of issues (interesting take on third party doctrine, too)

The Guardian: ‘It’s dangerous and it’s going to erode trust’: redesign of US government websites stokes surveillance fears

The Guardian: ‘It’s dangerous and it’s going to erode trust’: redesign of US government websites stokes surveillance fears by Jason Wilson (“An opaque White House office staffed largely by veterans of Elon Musk’s ‘department of government efficiency’ (Doge) has quietly … Continue reading →

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on The Guardian: ‘It’s dangerous and it’s going to erode trust’: redesign of US government websites stokes surveillance fears

W.D.N.Y.: Possibility of co-conspirators in mass murder justified emergency disclosure request to Apple, Verizon, and Facebook

In the Buffalo Tops Grocery mass shooting, the emergency disclosure request to Apple, Facebook, and Verizon was based on the possibility there were coconspirators. Even though defendant’s manifesto said he was acting alone, investigators didn’t have to take that at … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Plain view, feel, smell, Prison and jail searches, Social media warrants | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Possibility of co-conspirators in mass murder justified emergency disclosure request to Apple, Verizon, and Facebook

E.D.N.Y.: Flight out a window is exigency for police to enter

Defendant was wanted for a shooting incident in Flatbush, Brooklyn caught on video. When they came to where they suspected he was, he attempted to flee out a window. That gave exigency to enter. United States v. Richard, 2026 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Emergency / exigency, Franks doctrine, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Flight out a window is exigency for police to enter

W.D.Tenn.: A driveway isn’t always curtilage

A driveway isn’t always curtilage. If it’s not closed off, likely not. United States v. Lyons, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140145 (W.D. Tenn. June 24, 2026):

Posted in Curtilage | Comments Off on W.D.Tenn.: A driveway isn’t always curtilage

FL: Violation of knock-and-announce statute doesn’t require exclusion

A violation of the knock-and-announce statute for serving search warrants doesn’t require exclusion of the evidence under Hudson, which is followed. State v. Times, 2026 Fla. LEXIS 982 (June 25, 2026). “Idling” is not a crime for a passenger vehicle … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Knock and announce, Scope of search | Comments Off on FL: Violation of knock-and-announce statute doesn’t require exclusion