Author Archives: Hall

CA8: Not a 4A violation for school resource officer to handcuff sobbing second grader

It was not unreasonable for a school resource officer to handcuff for 15 minutes a 7-year-old sobbing second grader who he suspected of active resistance to going to the principal’s office. Aside from reasonableness, qualified immunity applies because the right … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstention, Qualified immunity, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA8: Not a 4A violation for school resource officer to handcuff sobbing second grader

D.S.C.: Failure to raise excessive force claim within search claim wasn’t IAC

Defense counsel’s failure to raise an excessive force claim as a part of his arrest wasn’t ineffective assistance of counsel on the merits of the arrest or subsequent search. Waters v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128341 (D. S.C. … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstention, Excessive force, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.S.C.: Failure to raise excessive force claim within search claim wasn’t IAC

CA6: Eyewitness identification alone can be RS

“So did the officer have reasonable suspicion to stop Lett? Yes. The eyewitness identifications, alone, created that suspicion.” United States v. Lett, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22987 (6th Cir. Aug. 1, 2019).* Defendant’s traffic stop for moving within his own … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA6: Eyewitness identification alone can be RS

CA3: Guilty plea waives a 4A claim, and the plea is the basis of conviction, not the search

A guilty plea waives a Fourth Amendment claim. The plea is the basis of conviction, not the search. United States v. Porter, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22990 (3d Cir. Aug. 1, 2019):

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on CA3: Guilty plea waives a 4A claim, and the plea is the basis of conviction, not the search

CA8: Parole search of cell phone was reasonable

Defendant was on supervised release in Minnesota as a result of a state conviction. His cell phone was subject to search on reasonable suspicion, and Riley does not bar a parole or probation search of a cell phone. Moreover, his … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA8: Parole search of cell phone was reasonable

N.D.Ala.: Renting bedroom from homeowner and paying in drugs still gave renter standing; but owner had apparent authority to consent

Defendant lived in a drug dealer’s house where he rented the room in exchange for drugs. He had unfettered access to come and go. That gave him standing in his own room. The owner, however, also had unrestricted access to … Continue reading →

Posted in Apparent authority, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: Renting bedroom from homeowner and paying in drugs still gave renter standing; but owner had apparent authority to consent

N.D.Iowa: Knocking on hotel room door and grabbing def to pull him out, even with an arrest warrant, violated his constitutionally protected area

Defendant answered the door of his hotel room, and he was pulled into the hallway and officers entered the room. Their justification: They understood he had a sawed off shotgun. But, they lacked any real factual justification that he actually … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Constitutionally protected area | Comments Off on N.D.Iowa: Knocking on hotel room door and grabbing def to pull him out, even with an arrest warrant, violated his constitutionally protected area

CA2: Whether NCMEC was a government actor wasn’t sufficiently developed by def

In this child pornography case, defendant argued that NCMEC was not a private actor citing Ackerman from the Tenth Circuit, but the record was not sufficiently developed for the court to conclude that. There was probable cause for the search … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Private search | Comments Off on CA2: Whether NCMEC was a government actor wasn’t sufficiently developed by def

D.Me.: Even if omission was reckless, missing info only added to PC

Even if the officer’s omission was reckless or intentional, adding in the missing information only makes the probable cause stronger. Therefore, his Franks claim fails. United States v. O’Neal, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126426 (D. Me. July 30, 2019).* Defendant’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Standing | Comments Off on D.Me.: Even if omission was reckless, missing info only added to PC

NY1: Parole officer’s search of def on arrest revealed gun; trial court erred in suppressing

Defendant’s parole officer had a warrant for defendant, and a patdown with the arrest resulted in plain feel of a gun. The trial court erred in suppressing the gun because it was validly found. People v. Jennings, 2019 NY Slip … Continue reading →

Posted in Good faith exception, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on NY1: Parole officer’s search of def on arrest revealed gun; trial court erred in suppressing

KY: Officers approached men on a street corner talking; telling def to “hang tight for a minute” because he wanted to run his name and SSN was a seizure requiring RS

Officers saw a group on a corner, so they initiated contact, just because they wanted to. They also attempted to get them to clean up the trash on the corner, which wasn’t shown to be their fault or responsibility. When … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Seizure, Standing | Comments Off on KY: Officers approached men on a street corner talking; telling def to “hang tight for a minute” because he wanted to run his name and SSN was a seizure requiring RS

NY4: Exclusionary rule wouldn’t be applied to probation search during a time of uncertainty in the law where law now settled; no deterrence possible

The exclusionary rule would not be applied to what turned out to be an illegal probation search at a time when the law was unclear. There is no deterrent effect to be gained by applying the exclusionary rule when other … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probation / Parole search, Warrant execution | Comments Off on NY4: Exclusionary rule wouldn’t be applied to probation search during a time of uncertainty in the law where law now settled; no deterrence possible

CA11: Deadly force on an unarmed man proved to be justified in the heat of the moment

An officer’s killing an unarmed man during a traffic stop was reasonable based on the officer’s reasonable reaction to what decedent was doing when he fished around in his vehicle and came out with an unknown object in his hand. … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA11: Deadly force on an unarmed man proved to be justified in the heat of the moment

AZ CoA finds REP in IP information under state constitution where 4A would not

While the Fourth Amendment’s third party doctrine does not recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in IP information, the court concludes that the state constitution does (and it follows several other states rejecting Miller and Smith on some basis). State … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on AZ CoA finds REP in IP information under state constitution where 4A would not

D.Kan.: Def’s 4A IAC claim fails for failing to show how he’d have won any issue

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim for not pursuing a search claim fails for lack of argument of probability of success. “While Vargas makes numerous arguments for alleged errors by counsel, he fails to support a finding that counsel was … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Def’s 4A IAC claim fails for failing to show how he’d have won any issue

D.V.I.: Consent wasn’t voluntary where def refused consent and officers kept asking

Defendant’s consent was involuntary. He refused consent and the officers kept asked him three times to get him to agree. United States v. Clark, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126985 (D. V.I. July 30, 2019). Defendant on the totality consented to … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Voluntariness | Comments Off on D.V.I.: Consent wasn’t voluntary where def refused consent and officers kept asking

MO: Def’s talking too fast and not looking as good as DL photo isn’t RS

The state trooper’s focus on defendant’s purse had nothing to do with the traffic stop, and it extended the stop. Her talking fast and not looking as good as the DL photo is not reasonable suspicion. The trial court’s suppression … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MO: Def’s talking too fast and not looking as good as DL photo isn’t RS

CA6: Attacks on facts of PC with “what-ifs” are question for jury on proof BRD

There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest. “Ruffin offers a parade of what-ifs in response” to that, but they’re all questions for the jury on guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not probable cause. United States v. Ruffin, 2019 U.S. App. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA6: Attacks on facts of PC with “what-ifs” are question for jury on proof BRD

CA4: Def’s unlocking cell phone without sharing passcode was not communicative act

The officer who had defendant’s cell phone asked her to unlock it. She entered the passcode without sharing it or him seeing her do it. It wasn’t a communicative act. It’s like providing a key. Her motion to suppress the … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Overseizure, Privileges | Comments Off on CA4: Def’s unlocking cell phone without sharing passcode was not communicative act

CA3: Petrs stated enough to get an immigration hearing on application of exclusionary rule to race-based stop as egregious violation of 4A

The petitioners in an immigration proceeding alleged a race based stop and detention by state officers stated enough to get a hearing on whether this was an egregious violation of the Fourth Amendment. Yoc-Us v. AG United States, 2019 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Pretext | Comments Off on CA3: Petrs stated enough to get an immigration hearing on application of exclusionary rule to race-based stop as egregious violation of 4A