Author Archives: Hall

CSO Online: Cops go into funeral home, attempt to unlock phone with dead man’s fingerprint

Not the first time, and certainly not the last: CSO Online: Cops go into funeral home, attempt to unlock phone with dead man’s fingerprint by Ms. Smith: Even if the cops can’t be legally accused of violating a dead man’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonableness | Comments Off on CSO Online: Cops go into funeral home, attempt to unlock phone with dead man’s fingerprint

E.D.Cal.: Alleged search of a public computer in a library for ptf’s usage didn’t violate any REP

Alleged search of a public computer in a college library for information about plaintiff’s use of it doesn’t violate any reasonable expectation of privacy. Berry v. Yosemite Cmty. College Dist., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64732 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2018). … Continue reading →

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Alleged search of a public computer in a library for ptf’s usage didn’t violate any REP

W.D.N.Y.: “Affidavit of personal knowledge” to show standing isn’t satisfied by the officer’s police reports

The Second Circuit requires an affidavit of personal knowledge to establish standing to contest a search. The officer’s report wasn’t enough just because the officer believed that defendant’s residence was the target of the search. United States v. Lewis, 2018 … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Good faith exception, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: “Affidavit of personal knowledge” to show standing isn’t satisfied by the officer’s police reports

D.Mass.: Def made his Franks challenge at the suppression hearing; statement was reckless and completely undermined nexus to house

Defendant showed enough to get a Franks hearing. United States v. Roman, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167167, 2017 WL 4517963 (D. Mass. Oct. 10, 2017). “Following the Franks hearing—which occurred on multiple days spread out between November of 2017 and … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Def made his Franks challenge at the suppression hearing; statement was reckless and completely undermined nexus to house

IN: Recording a recording off a Facebook account doesn’t violate the federal wiretap law

Defendant was accused of breaking into his ex-girlfriend’s apartment and stealing her work iPad and other personal things. She signed on to his Facebook account with a password he’d previously given her. She found a recording there which admitted he … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Computer and cloud searches | Comments Off on IN: Recording a recording off a Facebook account doesn’t violate the federal wiretap law

WaPo: Opinion: ‘The Watch’ blog: Lunch links: Louisiana attorney general approves of arresting people who threaten to file police complaints

WaPo: Opinion: ‘The Watch’ blog: Lunch links: Louisiana attorney general approves of arresting people who threaten to file police complaints by Radley Balko:

Posted in Police misconduct | Comments Off on WaPo: Opinion: ‘The Watch’ blog: Lunch links: Louisiana attorney general approves of arresting people who threaten to file police complaints

NJ: DV seizure order and SW issued; dismissal of DV matter doesn’t affect independent SW

Family court DV search warrant was adequate and helped support an additional search warrant by the criminal court. There was probable cause. The ultimate dismissal of the DV petition had no legal effect on the validity of the search warrant. … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on NJ: DV seizure order and SW issued; dismissal of DV matter doesn’t affect independent SW

DE: “The scope of the warrant so far outruns that probable cause finding—and is so lacking in particularity relative to that probable cause finding—that it qualifies as plain error.”

A rare outcome: “The scope of the warrant so far outruns that probable cause finding—and is so lacking in particularity relative to that probable cause finding—that it qualifies as plain error.” Buckham v. State, 2018 Del. LEXIS 166 (Apr. 18, … Continue reading →

Posted in Particularity, Probable cause, Scope of search | Comments Off on DE: “The scope of the warrant so far outruns that probable cause finding—and is so lacking in particularity relative to that probable cause finding—that it qualifies as plain error.”

S.D.Fla.: The fact FL law provides a reasonable expectation of privacy in bank records has nothing to do with an IRS summons

The fact Florida law provides a reasonable expectation of privacy in bank records has nothing to do with an IRS summons for bank records. Presley & Presley P.A. v. United States, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65421 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 16, … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonableness | Comments Off on S.D.Fla.: The fact FL law provides a reasonable expectation of privacy in bank records has nothing to do with an IRS summons

Wired: Why Police Should Monitor Social Media to Prevent Crime

Wired: Why Police Should Monitor Social Media to Prevent Crime by Christopher Raleigh Bousquet (opinion):

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Wired: Why Police Should Monitor Social Media to Prevent Crime

CA11: Financial fraud SW permits search of def’s wallet on his person

In a search warrant for financial fraud of defendant’s house, finding defendant there allowed a search of his wallet under the warrant. United States v. Shabazz, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 9774 (11th Cir. Apr. 18, 2018):

Posted in Scope of search | Comments Off on CA11: Financial fraud SW permits search of def’s wallet on his person

CA11: While time wasn’t clearly stated, it was inferred on the totality; therefore, not stale

While the affidavit for the search warrant didn’t clearly specify a time frame, it was inferred, and it was clearly reasonable to conclude on the totality that the defendant would still have the sought after images on his computer. United … Continue reading →

Posted in Staleness | Comments Off on CA11: While time wasn’t clearly stated, it was inferred on the totality; therefore, not stale

CA4: Even if Posse Comitatus Act was violated in investigation, there is no judicial remedy

Defendant argued “the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) violated the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (2012), by participating in the criminal investigation.” The motion wasn’t timely, and, on the merits, there is no remedy for violation. United … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on CA4: Even if Posse Comitatus Act was violated in investigation, there is no judicial remedy

New Law Review Article: “The vast majority of current Fourth Amendment doctrine unfounded, incoherent, and dangerous.”

Gray David, The Fourth Amendment Categorical Imperative, 116 Mich. L. Rev. Online 14 (2017): The vast majority of current Fourth Amendment doctrine unfounded, incoherent, and dangerous.

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on New Law Review Article: “The vast majority of current Fourth Amendment doctrine unfounded, incoherent, and dangerous.”

D.Nev.: Court order for cell phone detail information under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) requires only RS

A court order for cell phone detail information under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) requires only reasonable suspicion, following In re Applications of the United States of Am. for an Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d), 206 F. Supp. 3d … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Nev.: Court order for cell phone detail information under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) requires only RS

MA: Affidavit established MJ grow was for sale, not personal use

The affidavit for the search warrant established probable cause that defendant’s marijuana grow was for distribution and not for personal medical use. Commonwealth v. Richardson, 2018 Mass. LEXIS 236 (Apr. 17, 2018). The Franks challenge here was over an internet … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on MA: Affidavit established MJ grow was for sale, not personal use

MO: Warrantless seizure of black box data from semi violated 4A; automobile exception didn’t apply

After an accident, the information off the data recorder on defendant’s semi was seized and then searched by the police without a search warrant. The trial court suppressed, and the state filed an interlocutory appeal. Only three of its six … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Computer and cloud searches | Comments Off on MO: Warrantless seizure of black box data from semi violated 4A; automobile exception didn’t apply

E.D. Mich.: Officers’ (and government’s) assertion of consent is so false it “tarnishes the entirety of the Government’s case.”

Officers’ (and government’s) assertion of consent is so false it “tarnishes the entirety of the Government’s case.” There was nothing near reasonable suspicion or consent. United States v. Smith, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62041 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 12, 2018):

Posted in Consent, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on E.D. Mich.: Officers’ (and government’s) assertion of consent is so false it “tarnishes the entirety of the Government’s case.”

E.D.Mich.: Def’s alternative argument as to what SW affidavit showed doesn’t undermine PC

The defendant’s alternative argument about how the child pornography ended up on defendant’s computer didn’t undermine the probable cause for the search warrant. “The Court has already addressed Defendant’s argument that a single connection between a home computer and a … Continue reading →

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Def’s alternative argument as to what SW affidavit showed doesn’t undermine PC

TN: Argument “the rule” of witness exclusion of Rule 615 at suppression hearing has to be made in trial court

Defendant didn’t preserve for appeal his argument that the suppression hearing court allowed witnesses to sit in the rehearing of the suppression hearing because he didn’t make it to the trial court. At any rate, the transcripts of the hearing … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on TN: Argument “the rule” of witness exclusion of Rule 615 at suppression hearing has to be made in trial court