Author Archives: Hall

VA: Later adopted statutory exclusionary rule not retroactive

A statutory exclusionary rule for a particular action that was adopted after the search and seizure was not retroactive. Moore v. Commonwealth, 2023 Va. App. LEXIS 343 (CMay 30, 2023) (unpublished).* The totality shows reasonable suspicion to extend the stop … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on VA: Later adopted statutory exclusionary rule not retroactive

GA: Cell phone call SW was limited and not overbroad

The warrant for the cell phone’s call data was limited in time and reasonable. “Because, using a practical margin of flexibility, the date ranges in the search warrants were as specific as the circumstances and nature of the activity under … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Overbreadth, Scope of search | Comments Off on GA: Cell phone call SW was limited and not overbroad

NJ: Computer return of car owner’s suspended DL justified stop, but it had to end when it was obvious driver was not owner

A police car computer that tells the officer the owner of a vehicle has a suspended license is reasonable suspicion for a stop, unless there is objective evidence the driver cannot be the owner. Here, it was obvious the driver … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventory, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on NJ: Computer return of car owner’s suspended DL justified stop, but it had to end when it was obvious driver was not owner

GA: 2022 SW for cell phone illegally searched in 2020 had no independent basis; no GFE

The trial court did not err by granting the motion to suppress evidence seized as a result of the search of his cell phone because the State’s original warrantless search in 2020 was improper and the State did not remedy … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Independent source, Reasonable suspicion, Voluntariness | Comments Off on GA: 2022 SW for cell phone illegally searched in 2020 had no independent basis; no GFE

N.D.Ga.: UPS a private searcher, even with its “good-Samaritan motivation”

UPS is not a state actor when it searches suspicious packages, even with its “good-Samaritan motivation” that “overlaps with law enforcement’s mission.” United States v. Baxter, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93141 (N.D. Ga. May 11, 2023):

Posted in Private search | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: UPS a private searcher, even with its “good-Samaritan motivation”

Techstory: Cellphone Border Searches: Feds, You’ll Need a Warrant

Techstory: Cellphone Border Searches: Feds, You’ll Need a Warrant by Sneha Singh (“In a groundbreaking ruling, a federal district judge declared that authorities must obtain a warrant before searching an American citizen’s cell phone at the US border, except in … Continue reading →

Posted in Border search, Cell phones | Comments Off on Techstory: Cellphone Border Searches: Feds, You’ll Need a Warrant

D.Nev.: Affidavits for SWs don’t have to prove the underlying crimes

There was probable cause for the four search warrants here. “Much of Martinez’s arguments are based on the premise that the warrants are unsupported by probable cause because the affidavits did not prove the elements of the target crimes.” They … Continue reading →

Posted in Motion to suppress, Private search | Comments Off on D.Nev.: Affidavits for SWs don’t have to prove the underlying crimes

D.V.I.: Flyover of curtilage from navigable airspace was reasonable

Officers did a flyover of defendant’s home from navigable airspace and saw a marijuana grow. While he had a subjective reasonable expectation of privacy in the curtilage, not from 2000′. United States v. Flavius, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92974 (D.V.I. … Continue reading →

Posted in Curtilage, Inevitable discovery, Plain view, feel, smell, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.V.I.: Flyover of curtilage from navigable airspace was reasonable

NJ: Disputes in the facts on appeal show trial court should have held a hearing

“[W]e are persuaded the conflicting statements of fact presented by the State and defendant establish disputes of material fact warranting a testimonial hearing. The State claimed the search was justified under the plain view exception to the warrant requirement. Thus, … Continue reading →

Posted in Suppression hearings | Comments Off on NJ: Disputes in the facts on appeal show trial court should have held a hearing

NY: Second SW for phone a year later after first SW failed to show PC wasn’t timely

The first cell phone search warrant was rejected for lack of probable cause. It only provided a generic description of cell phones as repositories of potential evidence without linking it to this case. The phone was still in the evidence … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness, Scope of search | Comments Off on NY: Second SW for phone a year later after first SW failed to show PC wasn’t timely

GA: Not objecting to mention of “probation” search at trial was not IAC

Not objecting to defendant’s probation status where it came up as a probation search was not unreasonable. Plus, it would have otherwise come in. “Hutcheson’s probation status was thus necessary to complete the State’s story of the crime. Trial counsel’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Probation / Parole search, Scope of search | Comments Off on GA: Not objecting to mention of “probation” search at trial was not IAC

MI grants review in zoning drone case: Long Lake Twp. v. Maxon

Michigan SCt to set argument on whether it violates the Fourth Amendment to use a drone for aerial photography in zoning disputes. Long Lake Twp. v. Maxon, 2023 Mich. LEXIS 768 (May 24, 2023).* The issues: “(1) whether the appellee … Continue reading →

Posted in Body searches, Drones | Comments Off on MI grants review in zoning drone case: Long Lake Twp. v. Maxon

D.Colo.: Bank records have no REP so they can be obtained for restitution purposes

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in bank records, and the government can obtain them to enforce a restitution order. United States v. Osborn, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90076 (D. Colo. May 23, 2023). Defendant doesn’t get a Franks … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on D.Colo.: Bank records have no REP so they can be obtained for restitution purposes

CA11: Three CIs with overlapping information corroborated each other

Three informants’ overlapping information corroborated one another such that establishing their veracity was unnecessary. The affidavit in support of the warrant contained enough indicia of probable cause that an officer’s reliance was not unreasonable as it sufficiently linked the residence … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Excessive force, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on CA11: Three CIs with overlapping information corroborated each other

CA11: Drug dog arriving before warning ticket done did not extend stop

Where the drug dog arrived before the warning ticket was finished, the stop was not unlawfully extended. United States v. Gutierrez, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 12811 (11th Cir. May 24, 2023). Child protection officers obtained consent to enter plaintiff’s home. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Dog sniff, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on CA11: Drug dog arriving before warning ticket done did not extend stop

OH7: Officer taking the Fifth at suppression hearing because of other matters doesn’t prove Franks violation

At defendant’s suppression hearing, one of the officers was relieved of duty due to other misconduct, and he took the Fifth. On what remains in the affidavit and on the totality doesn’t otherwise show a Franks violation. State v. Hartung, … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OH7: Officer taking the Fifth at suppression hearing because of other matters doesn’t prove Franks violation

NYT: Here’s What Happens When Your Lawyer Uses ChatGPT

NYT: Here’s What Happens When Your Lawyer Uses ChatGPT by Benjamin Weiser (“A lawyer representing a man who sued an airline relied on artificial intelligence to help prepare a court filing. It did not go well.”):

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on NYT: Here’s What Happens When Your Lawyer Uses ChatGPT

M.D.Ga.: No right to challenge SW before execution

It isn’t apparent that there’s a right to challenge a search warrant before it is executed. (Rule 17 covers motions to quash subpoenas.) Even if there was, defendant doesn’t carry his burden. United States v. Crumpton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading →

Posted in Body searches, Franks doctrine, Motion to suppress, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on M.D.Ga.: No right to challenge SW before execution

AF: Telling wife in jail call to delete a social media account AFOSI was looking to search was obstruction

While defendant was in pretrial confinement, he called his wife and instructed her to delete a social media account that the government was intending to search. This led to his obstruction charge. The call was monitored by the jail. United … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Social media warrants, Staleness | Comments Off on AF: Telling wife in jail call to delete a social media account AFOSI was looking to search was obstruction

CA4: Def gets remand of unexplained warrantless search condition on supervised release

The condition of supervised release that defendant submit to warrantless searches wasn’t explained to him or justified. Remanded. United States v. Davila, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 12714 (4th Cir. May 23, 2023). Plaintiff’s driving, observed by an officer and caught … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Independent source, Prison and jail searches, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA4: Def gets remand of unexplained warrantless search condition on supervised release