Category Archives: Burden of pleading

Cal.2: MJ smell associated with minors still RS for an offense

Officers ran an LPN and saw that the vehicle had expired tags. Driving next to the car, officers smelled burnt marijuana and knew that the users were minors which is still an offense under California law. That was cause for … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Inevitable discovery, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on Cal.2: MJ smell associated with minors still RS for an offense

IN: Mistake of law to an illegal search or seizure applies to the scope of the law, not whether it even exists

The mistake of law “defense” to an illegal search or seizure applies to the scope of the law, not whether it even exists. Here, it didn’t. White v. State, 2022 Ind. App. LEXIS 390 (Dec. 8, 2022). The specific characteristics … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on IN: Mistake of law to an illegal search or seizure applies to the scope of the law, not whether it even exists

SC: Exigency for CSLI was shooting victim left for dead and defendant was armed and dangerous

There was exigency for CSLI. “Thus, this was not a standard criminal investigation seeking cell phone data; rather, this request sought to address an ongoing emergency because Carter was potentially armed and dangerous, had been involved in a violent crime … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of pleading, Cell site location information, Emergency / exigency, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on SC: Exigency for CSLI was shooting victim left for dead and defendant was armed and dangerous

MO: Objection for “lack of foundation and improper procedure” not a 4A challenge

An objection to a BAC test for lack of foundation and improper procedure does not preserve a Fourth Amendment challenge. Petersen v. State, 2022 Mo. LEXIS 226 (Nov. 22, 2022). The officers made a valid plain view to damage to … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Emergency / exigency, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on MO: Objection for “lack of foundation and improper procedure” not a 4A challenge

E.D.Ark.: Inmate states claim against Sheriff and jail phone provider that privileged attorney calls were turned over to police

Plaintiff Texas inmate was in an Arkansas county jail in 2015-17, and he discovered in 2021 through his current defense lawyer that the county jail phone contractor turned over telephone calls between him and his criminal defense lawyer to the … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Excessive force, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on E.D.Ark.: Inmate states claim against Sheriff and jail phone provider that privileged attorney calls were turned over to police

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

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”

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

MA: Ptf stated claim for unjustified community caretaking entry to investigate alleged elder abuse

Plaintiff was caring for a 95-year-old retired priest. She stated a claim for a Fourth Amendment violation for a warrantless entry into her house, in part, under the community caretaking function without justification. Gallagher v. S. Shore Hosp., Inc., 2022 … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Community caretaking function, Curtilage | Comments Off on MA: Ptf stated claim for unjustified community caretaking entry to investigate alleged elder abuse

MA: Def not prejudiced by third party’s response to SW

A third party in possession of Medicaid records was served with a search warrant, and appellant complains of the procedural nature of the third party’s response. [Aside from no standing,] Appellant doesn’t even attempt to show that the exclusionary rule … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Exclusionary rule, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on MA: Def not prejudiced by third party’s response to SW

TN: No IAC: strategic choice to distance def from premises

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the search of the premises. The defense at trial was that defendant was merely a guest who didn’t have control of the stuff found there. To link defendant more to the premises was … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Ineffective assistance, Standing | Comments Off on TN: No IAC: strategic choice to distance def from premises

D.C.Cir.: Bivens not extended to immigration detention

Bivens should not be extended to an immigration detention. K.O. v. Sessions, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 20984 (D.C. Cir. July 29, 2022). Plaintiff filed a § 1983 case against his prosecution which fails on Younger grounds. As to an illegal … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Burden of pleading, Immigration arrests, Waiver | Comments Off on D.C.Cir.: Bivens not extended to immigration detention

CA7: The question is only whether the officer reasonably believed def violated the law, not whether def did

“‘[T]he question … is whether [the officer] reasonably believed that he saw a traffic violation, not whether [the defendant] actually violated the [law].’ Cole, 21 F.4th at 428.” United States v. Yang, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 19125 (7th Cir. July … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Foreign searches, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: The question is only whether the officer reasonably believed def violated the law, not whether def did

NY Bronx: REP in one’s apartment building mailbox

Defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his mailbox in an apartment building from unreasonable searches. A search warrant was sought through the Bronx DA, but they were short staffed and recommended the officers get landlord consent. That was … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of pleading, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Mail and packages, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on NY Bronx: REP in one’s apartment building mailbox

PA: State bears initial burden of showing lack of REP that def must meet

In Pennsylvania, the state has to attempt to show a lack of reasonable expectation of privacy before it can argue a lack of standing. Here, it acquiesced in standing until after it lost the suppression argument, and that’s too late. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on PA: State bears initial burden of showing lack of REP that def must meet

D.Minn.: Alleged alibi wasn’t enough for Franks challenge here

Defendant wasn’t entitled to a Franks hearing by attempting to show that he had an alibi for only one controlled buy at issue, which wasn’t quite good enough anyway for probable cause. United States v. Washington, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Alleged alibi wasn’t enough for Franks challenge here

D.Idaho: Broad conclusory motions to suppress should be summarily denied

Broad conclusory motions to suppress should be summarily denied. “The Government and the Court had no warning that Munguia-Lopez was going to challenge his own stop at the hearing. This Court does not look favorably on counsel filing motions with … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading | Comments Off on D.Idaho: Broad conclusory motions to suppress should be summarily denied

UT: IAC shown for not challenging dog alert

The initial dog alert here did not provide probable cause for search of defendant’s vehicle. Thus, defense counsel was ineffective for not pursuing a Fourth Amendment challenge. “In summary, based on the record before us, a motion to suppress the … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Dog sniff, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress, Standing | Comments Off on UT: IAC shown for not challenging dog alert

TX: Boilerplate in cell phone SW affidavit not unreasonable, but facts of PC must be shown too

Boilerplate language in a search warrant application for a cell phone isn’t inappropriate, but there must still be a factual showing of probable cause for search of the phone. State v. Baldwin, 2022 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 321 (May 11, … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Cell phones, Warrant papers | Comments Off on TX: Boilerplate in cell phone SW affidavit not unreasonable, but facts of PC must be shown too

IN: State const’l arguments have to be raised in trial court first

Defendant’s argument for a change in standing law under the state constitution that he should have the ability to challenge the search of another person’s person and clothing wasn’t raised below, so it’s waived. State v. Allen, 2022 Ind. App. … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Burden of pleading, Overbreadth, Reasonableness, State constitution, Waiver | Comments Off on IN: State const’l arguments have to be raised in trial court first