Author Archives: Hall

N.D.Ind.: The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant

The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant. United States v. Tyms, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204894 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 10, 2022) Defendant was finally in custody when the police sought to take his … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, DNA, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant

M.D.Fla.: Lack of clarity of motion to suppress leads to denial

“Defendant’s motion is not a model of clarity.” “As an overarching concern, Defendant has not met his burden to be ‘sufficiently definite, specific, detailed, and nonconjectural’ in presenting a substantial claim as to either warrant.” “Defendant has not presented any … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Motion to suppress, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Lack of clarity of motion to suppress leads to denial

E.D.N.C.: SW needed for drone surveillance over a home

A request for a court order for drone surveillance over a home requires a warrant under the Fourth Amendment. A request under the All Writs Act isn’t the way to do it. In re Application of the United States For … Continue reading →

Posted in Curtilage, Drones, Search | Comments Off on E.D.N.C.: SW needed for drone surveillance over a home

CA4: Omissions under Franks have to be shown “designed to mislead”

When challenging a search warrant under Franks for omission of information, the defendant’s burden is higher because affidavits for warrants never include all available information and don’t have to, and the omissions have to be shown “designed to mislead.” Defendant … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA4: Omissions under Franks have to be shown “designed to mislead”

E.D.N.Y.: A single incident of legal mail being opened in jail doesn’t state a claim

A single incident of legal mail being opened before it got to plaintiff in a county jail doesn’t state a constitutional violation. Braithwaite v. Suffolk Cty. N.Y., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204233 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 9, 2022). There is no reasonable … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Prison and jail searches, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: A single incident of legal mail being opened in jail doesn’t state a claim

MN: Reliable hearsay can be considered for PC

In determining probable cause, “reliable hearsay” may be considered. State v. Dixon, 2022 Minn. LEXIS 483 (Nov. 9, 2022). The question of lack of probable cause was not in the motion to suppress, but the trial court held there was, … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Informant hearsay, Private search | Comments Off on MN: Reliable hearsay can be considered for PC

CA6: Carpenter not retroactive and doesn’t support successor habeas

Carpenter doesn’t suffice for a successor habeas. Besides, he’d lose on the merits. “Taylor cannot meet the statutory criteria for filing a second or successive habeas corpus petition. First, he does not rely on any newly discovered evidence. Second, ‘the … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell site location information, Drug or alcohol testing, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA6: Carpenter not retroactive and doesn’t support successor habeas

NC: Dog sniff of package in mail stream reasonable

A dog sniff of a package in the mail stream is reasonable. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy from a dog sniff there. State v. Teague, 2022-NCCOA-600, 2022 N.C. App. LEXIS 748 (Nov. 1, 2022). Defendants’ motion in limine … Continue reading →

Posted in Dog sniff, E-mail, Inevitable discovery, Mail and packages, Standing | Comments Off on NC: Dog sniff of package in mail stream reasonable

E.D.Mo.: Attenuation doctrine can apply to a Rodriguez violation

The attenuation doctrine can apply to a Rodriguez violation. United States v. Wright, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203269 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 8, 2022). On the surface, there was no reasonable suspicion for extending this stop. The court sets a hearing. … Continue reading →

Posted in Attenuation, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: Attenuation doctrine can apply to a Rodriguez violation

CA6: Officer’s mistake he’d worked with CI before not shown to be Franks violation

Officer’s mistake in saying he’d worked with CI before that proved false still wasn’t enough to show a Franks violation because it could just be an innocent mistake and not enough to undermine the probable cause. United States v. Duncan, … Continue reading →

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA6: Officer’s mistake he’d worked with CI before not shown to be Franks violation

CA10: Not unreasonable for state court to not apply exclusionary rule in sentencing

Under the unreasonable application standard of 2254, the Utah court did not unreasonably conclude the exclusionary rule would not be applied in the sentencing phase of a criminal trial. Menzies v. Powell, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 30789 (10th Cir. Nov. … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA10: Not unreasonable for state court to not apply exclusionary rule in sentencing

Reason: Houston Prosecutors Are Keeping Cash Seized From Defendants Whose Cases Were Compromised by Police Corruption

Reason: Houston Prosecutors Are Keeping Cash Seized From Defendants Whose Cases Were Compromised by Police Corruption by Jacob Sullum (“Even in cases that hinged on the trustworthiness of demonstrably untrustworthy cops, people are still waiting to get their money back.”)

Posted in Forfeiture | Comments Off on Reason: Houston Prosecutors Are Keeping Cash Seized From Defendants Whose Cases Were Compromised by Police Corruption

E.D.N.Y.: NYPD’s I-Card system when based on PC satisfies collective knowledge

NYPD issues what it calls an “I-Card” (“Activate Investigation Card”) which is supposed to be based on probable cause to believe a person committed a felony. With probable cause, the I-Card provides collective knowledge for an arrest. United States v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Collective knowledge | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: NYPD’s I-Card system when based on PC satisfies collective knowledge

CA6: City’s order closing hotel ptfs lived in didn’t violate 4A

Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment rights weren’t violated by the city’s order closing the motel they lived in because it was uninhabitable. There was a limited time they were without their personal property, but they were shortly allowed access to retrieve things. … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Seizure | Comments Off on CA6: City’s order closing hotel ptfs lived in didn’t violate 4A

D.D.C.: When stop was extended without RS, def’s assault on officers was not attenuated under Brown

The court finds the stop without reasonable suspicion. It was allegedly justified by paper LPN that didn’t match the car as without reasonable suspicion because the tags weren’t run until after the stop. That and other factors don’t make reasonable … Continue reading →

Posted in Attenuation, Exclusionary rule, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on D.D.C.: When stop was extended without RS, def’s assault on officers was not attenuated under Brown

OH1: No exclusionary rule for this alleged statutory violation for lack of notice of a probation search condition

Defendant’s contention the probation department failed to notify him of his search condition was a statutory violation but there is no exclusionary remedy for that. State v. Hayden, 2022-Ohio-3933, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 3721 (1st Dist. Nov. 4, 2022). In … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on OH1: No exclusionary rule for this alleged statutory violation for lack of notice of a probation search condition

W.D.N.C.: Def did not abandon backpack by hiding it nearby in bushes; he retained control

Defendant was at a McDonald’s with friends outside a car. When he saw the police, he put his backpack in the bushes to hide it while remaining nearby. He also went back to it to push it deeper into the … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on W.D.N.C.: Def did not abandon backpack by hiding it nearby in bushes; he retained control

D.Md.: Body armor found during vehicle search in drug case not more prejudicial than relevant

Body armor found during a vehicle search under a warrant is not excluded as more prejudicial than relevant under F.R.E. 403. This is a drug case, and it’s no more prejudicial than the drugs and firearms that presumably will be … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell site location information | Comments Off on D.Md.: Body armor found during vehicle search in drug case not more prejudicial than relevant

E.D.Ky.: Guns found during drug seizable as instrumentality of crime

In a drug search warrant, firearms found during the search are seizable as an instrumentality of a drug crime. United States v. Wilkins, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200342 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 19, 2022). Defendant’s running from his car during a … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Scope of search | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: Guns found during drug seizable as instrumentality of crime

N.D.Tex.: Officers don’t have to say they have PC before an automobile exception search

The officers didn’t say they had probable cause at the beginning of the search of the vehicle, but on the totality they did. United States v. Wesley, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200320 (N.D. Tex. Nov. 3, 2022).* The Fourth Amendment … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Nexus, Particularity, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on N.D.Tex.: Officers don’t have to say they have PC before an automobile exception search