Category Archives: Privileges

VI: Wife had apparent authority to consent to search for firearm in bedroom, even if they didn’t share it

Defendant’s wife had apparent common authority to consent to a police entry while defendant slept. She led police into the home and directed them to the handgun in defendant’s bedroom closet. This satisfied co-occupant consent. They lived together, she knew … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority, Consent, Privileges | Comments Off on VI: Wife had apparent authority to consent to search for firearm in bedroom, even if they didn’t share it

CA5: Stay of § 1983 shooting case was properly denied pending state criminal case

Plaintiff was charged in state court and sued under § 1983 in federal court over his shooting by the police. The federal court refused a stay and plaintiff ended up taking the Fifth. The denial of the stay of the … Continue reading

Posted in Privileges | Comments Off on CA5: Stay of § 1983 shooting case was properly denied pending state criminal case

C.D.Cal.: “4A privileges and immunities” are two claims, not one, and both denied here

Plaintiff’s case claimed Fourth Amendment privileges and immunities, but that’s two claims because privileges and immunities is under Art. IV, § 2, cl. 1 but it doesn’t state a claim under either. Gay v. Sheriff of L.A. Cty., 2025 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: “4A privileges and immunities” are two claims, not one, and both denied here

D.C.Cir.: Compelling defendant to unlock his phone was a 5A testimonial act

Compelling defendant to unlock his phone was a testimonial act under Hubbell, and it had to be suppressed. (Deciding the Fifth Amendment claim moots need to decide the Fourth Amendment claim.) United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 1219 … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges | Comments Off on D.C.Cir.: Compelling defendant to unlock his phone was a 5A testimonial act

E.D.Okla.: Search of lawyers and their cars coming into jail did not obstruct access to counsel

Stopping and searching the car and person of defense counsel coming into a USMS jail did not violate defendant’s right to access to counsel. The limitations were all reasonable. United States v. Freeman, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6745 (E.D. Okla. … Continue reading

Posted in Prison and jail searches, Privileges | Comments Off on E.D.Okla.: Search of lawyers and their cars coming into jail did not obstruct access to counsel

W.D.Pa.: No standing to contest civil investigative demands to third parties over medical records

Defendant had no standing to contest civil investigative demands to third parties, even involving medical records of others. United States v. Hertel & Brown Physical & Aquatic Therapy, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6437 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 13, 2025):

Posted in Privileges, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: No standing to contest civil investigative demands to third parties over medical records

CA6: Pending state court action was place to bring 4A claim under Younger

A state court action was going on involving plaintiff and his wetlands in Michigan, and he was enjoined from certain things. After state inspectors took soil and water samples, he sued in federal court. Younger abstention applies, and the state … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Privileges, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA6: Pending state court action was place to bring 4A claim under Younger

LA5: Defense attorney’s email about evidence on phone not protected by attorney-client privilege

A defense attorney’s email about evidence on a cell phone was used to get authority to search and seize the phone. Defendant claimed privilege; the state claimed that defense counsel was obligated to turn over material evidence. It was not … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges | Comments Off on LA5: Defense attorney’s email about evidence on phone not protected by attorney-client privilege

N.D.Cal.: No REP against police squeezing a package in transit in the mail

Squeezing a mail package in transit isn’t the same as a suitcase near at hand (Jones), and there was no reasonable expectation of privacy. Quinonez v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204220 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2024). A blanket … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Mail and packages, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: No REP against police squeezing a package in transit in the mail

OH4: Return of cell phone denied; it’s still potential evidence, and part of delay is refusing to give passcode

“Based on our review of the record, we find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Smith’s motion for return of his electronic devices. At the time of Smith’s request, it appears that the property was still … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Informant hearsay, Privileges, Standing | Comments Off on OH4: Return of cell phone denied; it’s still potential evidence, and part of delay is refusing to give passcode

CA5: The 4A doesn’t limit the number of officers that show up for an administrative search

This administrative search was valid. The number of officers showing up to do it isn’t a constitutional question. “Nor does the number of officers conducting the search change the inquiry. Hershner asserts no jurisprudential authority for the proposition that a … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Privileges, Protective sweep, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA5: The 4A doesn’t limit the number of officers that show up for an administrative search

The Conversation: Police stop more Black drivers, while speed cameras issue unbiased tickets − new study from Chicago

The Conversation: Police stop more Black drivers, while speed cameras issue unbiased tickets − new study from Chicago by Wenfei Xu, David Levinson, Michael J Smart & Nebiyou Yonas Tilahun:

Posted in Pretext, Privileges | Comments Off on The Conversation: Police stop more Black drivers, while speed cameras issue unbiased tickets − new study from Chicago

MA: Investigative equal protection claim can be enforced by DA’s discovery failure

Defendant raised an equal protection claim about discovery of ShapChat search warrants. Defense counsel stated that an informal survey of defense lawyers handling about 1/4th of the cases in Suffolk County showed that 85% of the warrants were against black … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MA: Investigative equal protection claim can be enforced by DA’s discovery failure

CA7: SW affiant doesn’t have to explore all of def’s possible defenses in affidavit

When the affiant officer establishes probable cause for a search warrant, he or she isn’t required to explore all the defenses or affirmative defenses the search target may have to put in the affidavit. Here, this arose in the context … Continue reading

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA7: SW affiant doesn’t have to explore all of def’s possible defenses in affidavit

D.C.Cir.: SW for multiple cell phones was valid because all were shown to be involved

This search warrant for multiple cell phones showed enough that multiple cell phones were involved in the offense under investigation, and, thus, the warrant was not overbroad, distinguishing United States v. Griffith, 867 F.3d 1265 (D.C. Cir. 2017) where there … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Nexus, Privileges, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.C.Cir.: SW for multiple cell phones was valid because all were shown to be involved

Cal.1: California juries may be instructed on refusal of consent to blood draw and insisting on a SW as evidence of guilt

“The question presented here is this: If, following a valid arrest for such an offense, a motorist refuses to cooperate in the taking of a blood test unless a warrant is first obtained, may the jury at the motorist’s ensuing … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Privileges | Comments Off on Cal.1: California juries may be instructed on refusal of consent to blood draw and insisting on a SW as evidence of guilt

D.Utah: An A-C communication seized that was still in the hands of the taint team was not a 4A or 6A violation

An attorney-client letter was obtained by search warrant and it was isolated by the taint team. Because no case was pending at the time, the Sixth Amendment was not violated, and the dismissal or disqualification is an necessary remedy. United … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent, Privileges, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.Utah: An A-C communication seized that was still in the hands of the taint team was not a 4A or 6A violation

NY1: Evidence of failing to open door when police are there with a SW doesn’t violate 4A

“Defendant did not preserve his claim that the admission of evidence that he did not open the door when the police knocked to show his consciousness of guilt violating his Fourth Amendment rights and his right to a fair trial … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Privileges | Comments Off on NY1: Evidence of failing to open door when police are there with a SW doesn’t violate 4A

IA: Court ordered privilege review of search was at its expense

When the court orders privilege review for the results of a search, it’s a court expense. State v. Iowa District Court for Emmet County, 2024 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 52 (May 10, 2024). “Lenhart does not assert fraud on the court, … Continue reading

Posted in Prison and jail searches, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standards of review | Comments Off on IA: Court ordered privilege review of search was at its expense

CO adopts Graham for state excessive force claims

Colorado adopts the Graham v. Connor standard for excessive force under state law. Plaintiff stated enough to overcome a motion to dismiss. Woodall v. Godfrey, 2024 COA 42 (Apr. 25, 2024).* “Scafidi’s ‘seizure’ was not unreasonable, because his arrest was … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Prison and jail searches, Privileges, Probable cause | Comments Off on CO adopts Graham for state excessive force claims