Author Archives: Hall

NYLJ: New York’s Red Flag Law Raises a Red Flag for the Fourth Amendment

NYLJ: New York’s Red Flag Law Raises a Red Flag for the Fourth Amendment (“New York’s Legislature should revise the Red Flag Law to expressly comport with the form and content requirements of search warrant applications pursuant to CPL 690. … Continue reading →

Posted in Administrative search | Comments Off on NYLJ: New York’s Red Flag Law Raises a Red Flag for the Fourth Amendment

D.P.R.: Cell phone records obtained by SW not self-authenticating as evidence under 902(11)

Cell phone records obtained by warrant are not self-authenticating under F.R.E. 902(11). More will be required. United States v. Charbonier-Laureano, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218249 (D.P.R. Dec. 5, 2023). The government’s knowledge fraud co-conspirators communicated by cell phone during period … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Cell phone records obtained by SW not self-authenticating as evidence under 902(11)

W.D.Wis.: No habeas relief for unlawful arrest

That 2254 petitioner’s state arrest was unreasonable doesn’t state grounds for relief from a conviction. Haring v. Prosise, 462 U.S. 306, 321 (1983). Ramirez v. Meisner, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218142 (W.D. Wis. Dec. 6, 2023). Defendant had no standing … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.Wis.: No habeas relief for unlawful arrest

CA5: Circuit authority can be “clearly established law” for qualified immunity

Circuit authority can be “clearly established law” for qualified immunity. “On the well-pleaded facts of this case, Walls was not suspected of any crime, posed no immediate threat to the safety of the deputies or others, and made no attempt … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on CA5: Circuit authority can be “clearly established law” for qualified immunity

WA: Def’s first appearance where bail was set under Gerstein not critical stage requiring counsel because bail could be revisited

Defendant’s first appearance where bail was set under Gerstein was not a critical stage requiring counsel because bail could be revisited. State v. Heng, 2023 Wash. LEXIS 603 (Dec. 7, 2023). “The government contends that [the search] was justified both … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Protective sweep | Comments Off on WA: Def’s first appearance where bail was set under Gerstein not critical stage requiring counsel because bail could be revisited

NY1: Def’s Franks challenge denial and 7 year sentence summarily affirmed 7½ years later

“Defendant’s request for a Franks hearing was properly summarily denied. He failed to make a ‘substantial preliminary showing’ that the purported statements he made to his wife and at the precinct relating to his ownership of the vehicle were false … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Probable cause | Comments Off on NY1: Def’s Franks challenge denial and 7 year sentence summarily affirmed 7½ years later

MD: False information in cold case arrest warrant suppresses statement made on arrest

17-year-old information from an admittedly unreliable CI who had the information two-three years before telling in 2008 coupled with a false statement in an affidavit for warrant about an identification that was just wrong did not provide probable cause for … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on MD: False information in cold case arrest warrant suppresses statement made on arrest

AR: HBO film crew ride-along on drug raid doesn’t lead to suppression

An HBO film crew was doing a ride-along with the DEA and local DTF officers for the making of “Meth Storm.” Defendant raises via post-conviction that the ride-along film crew violated the Fourth Amendment and the state constitution. The court … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell site location information, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress, Overbreadth, Warrant execution | Comments Off on AR: HBO film crew ride-along on drug raid doesn’t lead to suppression

NE declines to apply exclusionary rule to first interpretation of statute for DUI stop out of officer’s jurisdiction

The officer made a DUI stop outside his jurisdiction, and state law makes that important for his authority. The statute also has Fourth Amendment implications. And, the stop was with probable cause. Because the statute had not been interpreted like … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception | Comments Off on NE declines to apply exclusionary rule to first interpretation of statute for DUI stop out of officer’s jurisdiction

LA2: Arrest allegedly in violation of 4A leads to officer’s indictment, which is quashed because of justification

The officer here was charged with malfeasance in office for violating the Fourth Amendment by handcuffing a detainee for whom he was told there was an arrest warrant after he revoked consent to search: “I have someone you can talk … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on LA2: Arrest allegedly in violation of 4A leads to officer’s indictment, which is quashed because of justification

D.Utah: Questions about anything of “concern” or “illegal” inside vehicle were not about officer safety

The traffic stop was valid, but the extension of the stop was not, and defendant’s statements during the stop are suppressed. “Here, the officers extended the traffic stop to ask whether there was anything ‘of concern’ or ‘illegal’ inside of … Continue reading →

Posted in Dog sniff, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Utah: Questions about anything of “concern” or “illegal” inside vehicle were not about officer safety

D.Ariz.: Federal wildlife officer can make speeding stop in national wildlife refuge

A federal wildlife officer has the authority to make a stop for speeding in a national wildlife refuge under 50 C.F.R. § 27.31(a), (d). [Virginia v. Moore goes unmentioned: The stop would not violate the Fourth Amendment in any event.] … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Inevitable discovery, Reasonableness | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Federal wildlife officer can make speeding stop in national wildlife refuge

OH5: Put the affidavit for SW in the record at the suppression hearing

The affidavit for search warrant isn’t in the record on appeal, so the court presumes the regularity of proceedings in the trial court. The record that was made shows that there was probable cause. State v. Hill, 2023-Ohio-4381, 2023 Ohio … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of proof, Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on OH5: Put the affidavit for SW in the record at the suppression hearing

LA: Def’s lie about living in place to be searched helped GFE to apply to overcome staleness

The trial court and court of appeals both erred in finding that the affidavit for search warrant was “so lacking” in probable cause that the good faith exception should not apply. “The affidavit accompanying the search warrant application explained the … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Good faith exception, Nexus, Qualified immunity, Scope of search, Staleness | Comments Off on LA: Def’s lie about living in place to be searched helped GFE to apply to overcome staleness

CA3: Two minutes for a criminal records check during a traffic stop was reasonable under Rodriguez

“Law enforcement officers conduct traffic stops every day. No matter how minor the apparent infraction, every traffic stop must comply with the Fourth Amendment. It wraps every person, and every traffic stop, with a cloak of constitutional protection. The Fourth … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA3: Two minutes for a criminal records check during a traffic stop was reasonable under Rodriguez

DE: Mandamus can’t be used as interlocutory appeal of denial of motion to suppress

A petition for writ of mandamus can’t be used as an interlocutory appeal of denial of a motion to suppress. [Mandamus isn’t anywhere near a possible remedy.] In re Taylor for A Writ of Mandamus, 2023 Del. LEXIS 400 (Dec. … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Burden of pleading, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on DE: Mandamus can’t be used as interlocutory appeal of denial of motion to suppress

New Law Review: Policing Emotions: What Social Psychology Can Teach Fourth Amendment Doctrine

Wayne Logan, Policing Emotions: What Social Psychology Can Teach Fourth Amendment Doctrine, 77 Buffalo Law Review (forthcoming 2024):

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on New Law Review: Policing Emotions: What Social Psychology Can Teach Fourth Amendment Doctrine

D.Utah: Def in jail can’t get unrecorded phone calls to nonlawyers to prepare for trial

Defendant seeks unrestricted phone access without recording, but not just to his lawyer or standby counsel–every call. No First, Fourth, or Sixth Amendment violation (limited to lawyers). United States v. Cromar, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215498 (D. Utah Dec. 4, … Continue reading →

Posted in Prison and jail searches, Staleness, Stored Communications Act | Comments Off on D.Utah: Def in jail can’t get unrecorded phone calls to nonlawyers to prepare for trial

W.D.Mich.: Inmate can’t claim a medical condition and then refuse testing on 4A grounds

Plaintiff inmate claims to have an allergy. The prison wanted to draw blood to confirm. “Plaintiff has failed to state a claim that the Defendants violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures when they … Continue reading →

Posted in Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on W.D.Mich.: Inmate can’t claim a medical condition and then refuse testing on 4A grounds

E.D.Tenn.: Items unreasonably seized under SW as outside its scope still not returned because they are forfeitable

Some of the items seized under the warrant were named or were covered by plain view when the police got inside. Some are excludable, but they aren’t returned because the government intends to forfeit. United States v. Abdul-Latif, 2023 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Forfeiture, Ineffective assistance, Overseizure, Scope of search, Waiver | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: Items unreasonably seized under SW as outside its scope still not returned because they are forfeitable