Author Archives: Hall

GA: Where no violation of clear statute, no Heien reasonable mistake of law defense for state

Defendant did not violate the traffic statute that the officer stopped him for. Therefore, Heien’s reasonable mistake of law and good faith doesn’t apply. Moreover, there is no good faith exception in Georgia. Harris v. State, 2018 Ga. App. LEXIS … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonableness, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on GA: Where no violation of clear statute, no Heien reasonable mistake of law defense for state

CA11: Becoming defensive about some questioning during stop didn’t rise to RS

Being in a high crime area and then becoming defensive only when the officer asked defendant where his mother lived when it came up was not reasonable suspicion. Defendant’s frisk was unreasonable on the totality. Suppressing the gun found on … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on CA11: Becoming defensive about some questioning during stop didn’t rise to RS

CA9: Federal civil suit seeking to revisit Guam Superior Court PC determination barred by abstention

A federal suit to have the Guam Superior Court revisit its probable cause determination in a criminal case is barred by Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Santos v. Superior Court of Guam, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3433 (9th Cir. Feb. 14, 2018).

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens | Comments Off on CA9: Federal civil suit seeking to revisit Guam Superior Court PC determination barred by abstention

IN: Hot pursuit into Kentucky did not violate state constitution

Defendant was more than reasonably suspected of committing a homicide in Indiana, and police got a line on him heading to Kentucky. A vehicle matching the description of his was seen on the nearest bridge to Kentucky shortly thereafter and … Continue reading →

Posted in Hot pursuit, Reasonable suspicion, State constitution | Comments Off on IN: Hot pursuit into Kentucky did not violate state constitution

MA: Two detectives joining into a traffic stop didn’t make it unreasonable or extend it

The stop was for a traffic offense, and two detectives stopped to participate. Their questions about smelling marijuana didn’t unreasonably extend the stop. Commonwealth v. Buckley, 2018 Mass. LEXIS 87 (Feb. 14, 2018):

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on MA: Two detectives joining into a traffic stop didn’t make it unreasonable or extend it

CA7: Controlled buy corroborated CI

“Although the factors [on CI reliability] go both ways, on balance they support the CI’s reliability. Most significantly, the deputies corroborated the CI’s story with their own investigation by conducting surveillance and executing a controlled buy.” United States v. Haynes, … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on CA7: Controlled buy corroborated CI

New Republic: Should Cops Be Allowed to Rip Up Your Stuff While Looking for Drugs?

New Republic: Should Cops Be Allowed to Rip Up Your Stuff While Looking for Drugs? by Matt Ford: How the Supreme Court can curtail the destruction of private property during police searches

Posted in Scope of search | Comments Off on New Republic: Should Cops Be Allowed to Rip Up Your Stuff While Looking for Drugs?

wccftech: Sony Starts Sharing PlayStation 4 Data with the FBI – Begins with a Terror Investigation

wccftech: Sony Starts Sharing PlayStation 4 Data with the FBI – Begins with a Terror Investigation by Rafia Shaikh:

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, E-mail | Comments Off on wccftech: Sony Starts Sharing PlayStation 4 Data with the FBI – Begins with a Terror Investigation

S.D.N.Y.: A Franks challenge that is nothing more than an argument about inferences doesn’t plead enough to get a hearing

A Franks challenge that is nothing more than an argument about inferences doesn’t plead enough to get a hearing. United States v. Defilippo, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22784 (S.D. N.Y. Jan. 31, 2018):

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: A Franks challenge that is nothing more than an argument about inferences doesn’t plead enough to get a hearing

NY4: Scope of search claim defaulted by not presenting it to trial court

A facial challenge to a search warrant is a question of law, and no hearing is required. On the application, probable cause was shown along with the CI’s reliability. Defendant’s claim the search exceeded the search warrant is defaulted for … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Standing | Comments Off on NY4: Scope of search claim defaulted by not presenting it to trial court

LA2: IAC claim was fact intensive and denied w/o prejudice to pursue in post-conviction

“After reviewing this record, we find that the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel is not adequately developed in the record and would be more properly raised in an application for PCR. The defendant’s contention that the recording is inadmissible … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on LA2: IAC claim was fact intensive and denied w/o prejudice to pursue in post-conviction

E.D.Ky.: Subjective belief in implied consent to enter was unreasonable; motion to suppress granted

The officer’s subjective belief in implied consent was unreasonable. There was no implied consent, and the motion to suppress is granted, despite the R&R. “Here, it is undisputed that neither Officer Tackett nor Officer Stevens asked for permission to enter … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: Subjective belief in implied consent to enter was unreasonable; motion to suppress granted

E.D.Mich.: State court’s finding def didn’t plead enough for Franks hearing was not “unreasonable” for AEDPA

Defendant didn’t plead enough to get a state court hearing on his Franks issue. The state court’s decision falls within Stone v. Powell’s “full and fair opportunity” to litigate, and he took that issue up on his state appeal. Rooks … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: State court’s finding def didn’t plead enough for Franks hearing was not “unreasonable” for AEDPA

SCOTUSBlog: Argument preview: Should courts read statutory exclusionary rules broadly?

SCOTUSBlog: Argument preview: Should courts read statutory exclusionary rules broadly? by Richard Re:

Posted in Exclusionary rule, SCOTUS | Comments Off on SCOTUSBlog: Argument preview: Should courts read statutory exclusionary rules broadly?

Reason: Alabama Prosecutor, Sheriff Threaten to Put More People in Prison in Order to Keep Seizing Massive Amounts of Property

Reason: Alabama Prosecutor, Sheriff Threaten to Put More People in Prison in Order to Keep Seizing Massive Amounts of Property by Scott Shackford: Lawmakers are considering long-overdue civil asset forfeiture reform, and law enforcement leaders aren’t happy.

Posted in Forfeiture | Comments Off on Reason: Alabama Prosecutor, Sheriff Threaten to Put More People in Prison in Order to Keep Seizing Massive Amounts of Property

Above the Law: The Vanilla Ice Rule: “Anything less than the best is a felony.”

Above the Law: The Vanilla Ice Rule by Matthew W. Schmidt: Litigators must remember that “anything less than the best is a felony.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Above the Law: The Vanilla Ice Rule: “Anything less than the best is a felony.”

CA6: LEO’s conviction for criminal civil rights violation for wrongful entry to arrest affirmed

Defendant was a police officer and he’s convicted here of cirminal civil rights violation for wrongful entry into the victim’s house. The event started when the victim came home to his apartment building, found defendant parked in his parking spot, … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest | Comments Off on CA6: LEO’s conviction for criminal civil rights violation for wrongful entry to arrest affirmed

D.Nev.: Def files a Franks challenge to a state issued SW, and the government says it won’t use the product of the search

The defendant filed a motion to suppress under Franks alleging numerous falsehoods in the search warrant application issued by a state judge in Arizona. “James is surprised by the government’s response. Rather than defend the credibility and integrity of the … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Nev.: Def files a Franks challenge to a state issued SW, and the government says it won’t use the product of the search

E.D.Ky.: To claim IAC for not challenging SW, the affidavit and SW have to be in the 2255 submission or say how

“As explained in the plea agreement, the search warrant was a state warrant obtained by the Lexington Police Department. D.E. 95 at 2. The materials related to the warrant are not in the record of this case. Strickland provides no … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: To claim IAC for not challenging SW, the affidavit and SW have to be in the 2255 submission or say how

MA: Consent to search for firearms and drugs “in the vehicle” wasn’t notice that the officer would search under the hood; no consent for that search

The trial court properly granted defendant’s motion to suppress because his consent to a search for drugs or firearms “in the vehicle” did not authorize an officer to search under the vehicle’s hood and to remove the air filter, since … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Scope of search | Comments Off on MA: Consent to search for firearms and drugs “in the vehicle” wasn’t notice that the officer would search under the hood; no consent for that search