Author Archives: Hall

CA6: PO’s information that def was probably at a house was enough to arrest him there on a warrant

Information from his PO justified defendant’s arrest on a warrant at his brother’s place. He’d been arrested there before, and he was seen there. Officers did not need to exclude other possible places he should have been first. United States … Continue reading →

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA6: PO’s information that def was probably at a house was enough to arrest him there on a warrant

NYCo.: Arrests can’t be suppressed

“Defendant was charged with committing specific acts of violence against an identifiable person, who reported the incident. An arrest itself cannot be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree, and defendant himself was not a suppressible fruit. Nor was he … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of pleading, Ineffective assistance, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on NYCo.: Arrests can’t be suppressed

CA8: Police with arrest warrant could enter third-party premises to arrest defendant

Police with a warrant for defendant could enter a third party’s premises to arrest him on probable cause that he was present. Under Steagald, defendant had no more reasonable expectation of privacy in the third party’s premises than the owner … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Emergency / exigency, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA8: Police with arrest warrant could enter third-party premises to arrest defendant

What happens when Flock ALPRs misread an LPN?

Arkansas police drew guns on a family, then blamed a license plate frame.

Posted in Automatic license plate readers | Comments Off on What happens when Flock ALPRs misread an LPN?

D.Neb.: Just because the state seizes a cell phone doesn’t mean they know the Brady implications of the contents

Just because the state seizes a cell phone doesn’t mean they know the Brady implications of the contents. Moss v. Jeffreys, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45716 (D. Neb. Mar. 4, 2026) (§ 60.58 n.2) 2255 petitioner’s claim that defense counsel … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Cell phones, Good faith exception, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Neb.: Just because the state seizes a cell phone doesn’t mean they know the Brady implications of the contents

Two on qualified immunity

“The Anders point to no case holding that officers violated the Fourth Amendment in the process of levying property pursuant to a valid writ of execution. ‘For search and seizure claims, the Supreme Court has cautioned that “courts should define … Continue reading →

Posted in Qualified immunity | Comments Off on Two on qualified immunity

D.D.C.: Illegal search on stop tainted consent

“On August 12, 2025, seven U.S. Marshals partially surrounded Defendant Judge Alston’s car over a minor parking violation. The Government concedes that before Alston gave any consent, a Marshal began illegally searching his car. Because that initial illegal search both … Continue reading →

Posted in Attenuation, Consent, Emergency / exigency, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.D.C.: Illegal search on stop tainted consent

N.D.Iowa: RS and PC for stop and then search, so justification for drug dog is irrelevant

Based on two bases of collective knowledge, the officer had justification for a stop and a search, so the justification for the drug dog isn’t even relevant. United States v. Carter, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45275 (N.D. Iowa Mar. 5, … Continue reading →

Posted in Collective knowledge, Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Iowa: RS and PC for stop and then search, so justification for drug dog is irrelevant

D.Ariz.: Alleged perjury at state suppression hearing doesn’t overcome Stone bar

2254 petitioner’s claim the officer perjured himself during his suppression hearing doesn’t overcome the Stone bar. Soliven v. Thornell, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45209 (D. Ariz. Mar. 5, 2026). 2254 petitioner’s effort to include an “inadvertently omitted” Fourth Amendment claim … Continue reading →

Posted in Issue preclusion, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Alleged perjury at state suppression hearing doesn’t overcome Stone bar

D.Md.: Claim for “constructive seizure” fails

Plaintiff doesn’t state a claim for a “constructive seizure” by telling someone else of a warrant being out. Gladden v. Bd. of Educ. of Harford Cty., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45075 (D. Md. Mar. 5, 2026).* Defendant’s ineffective assistance of … Continue reading →

Posted in E-mail, Ineffective assistance, Seizure, Social media warrants | Comments Off on D.Md.: Claim for “constructive seizure” fails

Reason: Controversial Geofence Warrants Face Supreme Court Challenge

Reason: Controversial Geofence Warrants Face Supreme Court Challenge by J.D. Tuccille (“It sometimes seems technology provides a moving target for the Fourth Amendment, evolving new means of snooping on people while courts struggle to keep up. That’s the case with … Continue reading →

Posted in geofence, SCOTUS | Comments Off on Reason: Controversial Geofence Warrants Face Supreme Court Challenge

NJ: Alleged mistaken year in SW affidavit not a mere typo that can be overlooked

The mistaken year here was no mere typo that can be overlooked. It was repeated three times, and it made the probable cause showing stale. State v. Harris, 2026 N.J. Super. LEXIS 35 (Mar. 5, 2026):

Posted in Staleness | Comments Off on NJ: Alleged mistaken year in SW affidavit not a mere typo that can be overlooked

CA10: Def’s mid-trial motion to suppress can’t be justified and was waiver

Defendant’s mid-trial motion to suppress can’t be justified and was waiver. United States v. Cooks, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 6547 (10th Cir. Mar. 5, 2026). Defendant’s post-verdict motion for judgment of acquittal alleging conclusory violations of the Fourth and Fifth … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Particularity, Waiver | Comments Off on CA10: Def’s mid-trial motion to suppress can’t be justified and was waiver

CA8: Crowd dispersal was not a seizure

Police actions in dispersing a crowd were not a seizure, even using less than lethal force. Perkins v. City of Des Moines, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 6528 (8th Cir. Mar. 5, 2026).* CBP officer’s conviction for excessive force on a … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Probable cause, Seizure | Comments Off on CA8: Crowd dispersal was not a seizure

D.Minn.: Def arrested away from his motorcycle couldn’t have his attached backpack inventoried

Defendant was on the patio of a bar drinking a beer, and his motorcycle was 50-100′ away with his backpack on it. He was arrested, and he’d arranged for others to take his motorcycle. The backpack was seized and searched. … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Inventory, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Def arrested away from his motorcycle couldn’t have his attached backpack inventoried

ABAJ: Surveillance footage enters slapstick comedy TV genre, and that could be dangerous, lawyer says

ABAJ: Surveillance footage enters slapstick comedy TV genre, and that could be dangerous, lawyer says by Adam Banner. About halfway in:

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on ABAJ: Surveillance footage enters slapstick comedy TV genre, and that could be dangerous, lawyer says

S.D.Ohio: Two on Stone

“Because Stone v. Powell prohibits this Court’s consideration of Petitioner’s Fourth Amendment claim, the Magistrate Judge’s denial of expansion of the record to include the dash cam footage is affirmed because consideration of that footage is prohibited by Stone. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Issue preclusion | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Two on Stone

AR overrules state constitution’s pretextual arrest case from 2002; reasonableness is the key

Arkansas overrules State v. Sullivan, 348 Ark. 647, 74 S.W.3d 215 (2002), which held that a pretextual arrest violated the state constitution, holding this time that Fourth Amendment reasonableness should control. Gamble v. State, 2026 Ark. 44 (Mar. 5, 2026) … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonableness, State constitution | Comments Off on AR overrules state constitution’s pretextual arrest case from 2002; reasonableness is the key

CA5: Driver’s lie about having a gun on him justified a frisk of the passenger, too

Driver’s lie about having a gun on him justified a frisk of the passenger, too; Ybarra distinguished. United States v. Ducksworth, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 6255 (5th Cir. Mar. 3, 2026):

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA5: Driver’s lie about having a gun on him justified a frisk of the passenger, too

M.D.Ala: Man with gun and body armor created exigency for warrantless entry

The suspect here was armed and wearing body armor, and there was clear exigency fully coalescing in the last 25 minutes. That justified an exigency based entry. The fact it turned out to be wrong doesn’t matter. United States v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on M.D.Ala: Man with gun and body armor created exigency for warrantless entry