Author Archives: Hall

N.D.N.Y.: Escapee from BOP halfway house had no REP in apt. where he was found

Defendant was an escapee from a BOP halfway house, and he had no reasonable expectation of privacy where he was found. Also, he was subject to a search condition at the halfway house, and that’s not avoided by escape. United … Continue reading →

Posted in Community caretaking function, Inventory, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.N.Y.: Escapee from BOP halfway house had no REP in apt. where he was found

Reason: A SWAT Team Destroyed an Innocent Man’s Shop. Then the City Left Him With the Bill.

Reason: A SWAT Team Destroyed an Innocent Man’s Shop. Then the City Left Him With the Bill. by Billy Binion (“Pena didn’t fault the city for attempting to subdue an allegedly dangerous person. But he objected to what came next: … Continue reading →

Posted in Warrant execution | Comments Off on Reason: A SWAT Team Destroyed an Innocent Man’s Shop. Then the City Left Him With the Bill.

E.D.Tenn.: Suppression not remedy for violation of equal protection

Suppression of evidence is not the remedy for an equal protection violation, even if it were valid, which it’s not. United States v. Christie, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129172 (E.D. Tenn. July 26, 2023). A fictitious license plate is reasonable … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventory, Pretext, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: Suppression not remedy for violation of equal protection

S.D.Ind.: Drone use that didn’t go over curtilage was reasonable

The use of a drone to surveil plaintiffs’ home from a distance in a child welfare case was not unreasonable. The drone didn’t fly over the house or curtilage, and the police were concerned plaintiffs had a “small arsenal” and … Continue reading →

Posted in Drones, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on S.D.Ind.: Drone use that didn’t go over curtilage was reasonable

CA10: Civil remedy for violation of Posse Comitatus Act, not exclusion

The remedy for a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act is civil, not exclusion. United States v. King, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19052 (10th Cir. July 25, 2023) (denying COA). “On the whole, the factors outlined in Chavez provide mixed … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on CA10: Civil remedy for violation of Posse Comitatus Act, not exclusion

Cal.3: PC to search passenger compartment for gun didn’t extend to the trunk

Officers had probable cause to search defendant’s passenger compartment for a firearm. When the gun wasn’t found there, the officer searched the trunk, finding it. The probable cause, however, did not extend to the trunk. People v. Leal, 2023 Cal. … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Scope of search | Comments Off on Cal.3: PC to search passenger compartment for gun didn’t extend to the trunk

CA4: Not clearly established that VA DOC can’t drug test a Telecommunications Network Coordinator

Qualified immunity applies to the Virginia DOC directing a drug test of a Telecommunications Network Coordinator. “After VDOC fired Garrett for declining a random drug test, Garrett sued, alleging that VDOC employees violated his Fourth Amendment rights by applying VDOC’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA4: Not clearly established that VA DOC can’t drug test a Telecommunications Network Coordinator

D.D.C.: SEC admin subpoena for law firm cyberattack was narrowed to only affected clients

Covington & Burling was the target of a cyberattack, and the SEC investigated. It wanted the names of all affected clients, but C&B resisted, seeking narrower disclosure. The law firm agreed that only certain affected clients should be disclosed, and … Continue reading →

Posted in Administrative search, Scope of search | Comments Off on D.D.C.: SEC admin subpoena for law firm cyberattack was narrowed to only affected clients

E.D.Wis.: Late disclosed information justified the late filing of the motion to suppress

Late disclosed information justified the late filing of the motion to suppress. But, it still loses on the merits. United States v. Love, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126671 (E.D. Wis. July 24, 2023).* This stop was based on reasonable suspicion … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Late disclosed information justified the late filing of the motion to suppress

E.D.N.Y.: In a murder for hire case, a two year delay between the killing and the search didn’t make it presumably stale

In a murder for hire case, a two year delay between the homicide and the search warrant for defendant’s premises did not make the warrant presumably stale. The warrant sought digital evidence, and there were four conspirators and it spanned … Continue reading →

Posted in Dog sniff, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion, Staleness, Uncategorized | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: In a murder for hire case, a two year delay between the killing and the search didn’t make it presumably stale

DE: SW issuing magistrate not barred from hearing suppression motion

The suppression hearing judge is not disqualified just because he or she considered the affidavit and issued the search warrant. Willis v. State, 2023 Del. LEXIS 238 (July 24, 2023). Setting inaccuracies in the search warrant affidavit aside, there was … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Franks doctrine, Neutral and detached magistrate, Reasonableness | Comments Off on DE: SW issuing magistrate not barred from hearing suppression motion

D.Kan.: The “Kansas Two-Step” order

Shaw v. Jones, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126478 (D. Kan. July 21, 2023):

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on D.Kan.: The “Kansas Two-Step” order

techdirt: Court Says It’s Fine For Cops To Use Cell Phones To Peep Into People’s Cars

techdirt: Court Says It’s Fine For Cops To Use Cell Phones To Peep Into People’s Cars by Tim Cushing (“What is ‘plain view?’ Cops claim it’s anything anyone could see if they happened to be in the same place at … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on techdirt: Court Says It’s Fine For Cops To Use Cell Phones To Peep Into People’s Cars

CA6: Unintended target of a police shooting, another officer, has a 4A seizure and excessive force claim

One officer fired a gun at a suspect inside a dwelling, apparently without aiming, and hit another officer. That was still a Fourth Amendment seizure of the person of the officer despite being an unintended target. Kilnapp v. City of … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of proof, Excessive force, Seizure | Comments Off on CA6: Unintended target of a police shooting, another officer, has a 4A seizure and excessive force claim

VT: 14-year-old sex assault victim had sufficient common authority to consent to search of premises for evidence of that crime

Defendant was accused of sexual assault of his 14-year-old daughter, he was arrested, and released on conditions, one of which was a no contact order to say away from the house. The 14-year-old had enough common authority to consent to … Continue reading →

Posted in Apparent authority, Consent, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on VT: 14-year-old sex assault victim had sufficient common authority to consent to search of premises for evidence of that crime

NYT: Kansas Troopers ‘Waged War on Motorists,’ Federal Judge Finds

NYT: Kansas Troopers ‘Waged War on Motorists,’ Federal Judge Finds by Mitch Smith (“The judge said the Highway Patrol had made a habit of wrongly questioning out-of-state drivers in hopes of turning up drugs.”):

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on NYT: Kansas Troopers ‘Waged War on Motorists,’ Federal Judge Finds

IN: 3 am entry into backyard to look for weapon when no one around couldn’t be justified by exigency

“There was no emergency here. Officer Eber and the trial court expressed concern that a firearm might have been lying in Hinton’s backyard and could be accessed by a child or other person. But, even if so, there was no … Continue reading →

Posted in Collective knowledge, Curtilage, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on IN: 3 am entry into backyard to look for weapon when no one around couldn’t be justified by exigency

N.D.Ga.: Civilly committed have no REP in common computer files

The plaintiff is confined in the Texas Civil Commitment Center. He has no privacy interest in the files he’s saved on TCCC common computers for his cases. Rogers v. McLane, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125554 n. 11 (N.D. Tex. June … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Computer and cloud searches, Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Civilly committed have no REP in common computer files

techdirt: Bill Limiting Data Broker Sales To Law Enforcement Moves Forward

techdirt: Bill Limiting Data Broker Sales To Law Enforcement Moves Forward by Tim Cushing (“The Supreme Court made it clear in 2018 with its Carpenter decision: gathering historical cell site location info in bulk was impermissible under the Fourth Amendment. … Continue reading →

Posted in Digital privacy | Comments Off on techdirt: Bill Limiting Data Broker Sales To Law Enforcement Moves Forward

MI: Omission def was a CI was not material where SW was based on possession and sale of drugs

“Agent Merle’s failure to reveal that Brown was a CI for DTF was not a material omission. As discussed previously, the warrant affidavit was based on Brown’s possession and sale of illegal drugs, which did not fall within the scope … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MI: Omission def was a CI was not material where SW was based on possession and sale of drugs