Category Archives: Privileges

E.D.Cal.: Ptf doesn’t sufficiently allege access to private medical information violated 4A

“Plaintiff alleges that Defendants Oakden and Reynolds’s ‘unlawful access to private medical information’ violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights. FAC at 4. Plaintiff’s vague and conclusory allegations are insufficient to establish a violation of the Fourth Amendment. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Ptf doesn’t sufficiently allege access to private medical information violated 4A

GA: No case says SW required to ask for cell phone password

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not arguing that a warrant was required for a request for a cell phone password. No case anywhere says that’s required. Reynolds v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 303 (Sep. 22, 2026). The inventory search of … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Excessive force, Inventory, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on GA: No case says SW required to ask for cell phone password

D.N.J.: Pretrial detainee’s cell search and seizure of papers caused no prejudice nor revealed legal strategies

Defendant was in a federal detention center pending trial, and his cell was searched and legal materials for trial were seized. His Fourth Amendment claim fails on its face. His Sixth Amendment claim also fails because a BOP attorney screened … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Prison and jail searches, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.N.J.: Pretrial detainee’s cell search and seizure of papers caused no prejudice nor revealed legal strategies

GA reaffirms a constitutional right of privacy in medical records

Georgia reaffirms there is a constitutional right of privacy in medical records. Here it was a civil discovery dispute. Goodell v. Moulton, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 232 (Aug. 11, 2026):

Posted in Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on GA reaffirms a constitutional right of privacy in medical records

S.D.Tex.: Compelling def to give up combination to safe during search violated 5A

Compelling defendant to give up the combination of a safe in his shared dwelling to search it under a warrant violated the Fifth Amendment. United States v. Villarreal-Resendiz, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174690 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 5, 2026):

Posted in Privileges | Comments Off on S.D.Tex.: Compelling def to give up combination to safe during search violated 5A

MI: Suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings

A suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings, and defendant was unrepresented at that point due to disagreements with first retained and then appointed counsel. Remanded. The pretrial motions in general were disorganized, and the Fourth Amendment claim … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Privileges, Qualified immunity, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on MI: Suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings

CA7: Controlled buy justified stop, dog sniff, and search

The controlled buy off defendant gave probable cause to search his car after he left it, irrespective of an alleged pretextual traffic stop and use of a drug dog. United States v. Randle, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 22657 (7th Cir. … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Automobile exception, Dog sniff, Issue preclusion, Privileges, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA7: Controlled buy justified stop, dog sniff, and search

CA8: Admission of anonymous tip that led to stop violated Confrontation Clause

Admission in evidence of the anonymous tip that led to defendant’s stop violated the Confrontation Clause. United States v. Simpson, 25-1263 (8th Cir. June 2, 2026). The search warrants here were subject to the Privacy Protection Act, and they were … Continue reading →

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Privileges, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA8: Admission of anonymous tip that led to stop violated Confrontation Clause

OH5: DTF officer can ask marked car to make stop

A DTF officer surveilling defendant who saw a traffic offense could ask a marked car to make a traffic stop. State v. Streeter, 2026-Ohio-1668 (5th Dist. May 5, 2026).* In the Fulton County 2020 ballot seizure and return case, the … Continue reading →

Posted in Collective knowledge, Good faith exception, Independent source, Privileges | Comments Off on OH5: DTF officer can ask marked car to make stop

E.D.Va.: SW for WaPo’s reporter’s home and devices violated Privacy Protection Act

The search warrant for a Washington Post reporter’s computers, phone, and files violated the Privacy Protection Act because it was not evidence of a crime or contraband. It also implicates prior restraint on speech. The USMJ’s order that the court … Continue reading →

Posted in Privileges, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Warrant execution, Warrant papers | Comments Off on E.D.Va.: SW for WaPo’s reporter’s home and devices violated Privacy Protection Act

E.D.Va.: SWs don’t have to specify how they’re executed; photos of posed hands not suppressed

The warrant here required “photographing his hands, fingers, and forearms.” The search warrant’s particularity wasn’t violated by manipulating his hands to allegedly mimic what was seen in child pornography photographs off his computer. Search warrants don’t have to specify how … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution | Comments Off on E.D.Va.: SWs don’t have to specify how they’re executed; photos of posed hands not suppressed

WaPo: Second judge maintains DOJ can’t search data seized from Post reporter

WaPo: Second judge maintains DOJ can’t search data seized from Post reporter by Perry Stein& Aaron Schaffer (“The Justice Department had taken a phone and computers belonging to The Washington Post’s Hannah Natanson as part of a leak investigation.”) The … Continue reading →

Posted in Privileges | Comments Off on WaPo: Second judge maintains DOJ can’t search data seized from Post reporter

W.D.N.Y.: Civil discovery dispute denies access to other employees’ cell phones as 4A issue

In an employment action against a city, plaintiff sought discovery of messages on cell phones. Making the city seek them raises Fourth Amendment concerns under O’Connor v. Ortega. Reynolds v. City of Rochester, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93293 (W.D.N.Y. Apr. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Civil discovery dispute denies access to other employees’ cell phones as 4A issue

E.D.Mich.: Possible 5A violation in obtaining cell phone passcode mooted by inevitable discovery; they’d get into it anyway

The government obtained defendant’s cell phone passcode by questioning him. Despite the potential Fifth Amendment violation, the court finds that the cell phone would have been opened by the government’s forensics team anyway, so inevitable discovery applies. United States v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, immigration stops, Pretext, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Possible 5A violation in obtaining cell phone passcode mooted by inevitable discovery; they’d get into it anyway

DE: Lack of binding authority for 5A cell phone thumbprint claim means it’s denied

Trial counsel didn’t challenge the use of defendant’s thumbprint to access his cell phone, acknowledging case law against it being testimonial. “It does not appear that either this Court or the United States Supreme Court has addressed the issue. Nor … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on DE: Lack of binding authority for 5A cell phone thumbprint claim means it’s denied

MN: Physician-patient privilege doesn’t exempt medical records from SW

Nonprivileged information in a patient’s medical records does not automatically become privileged when it is transmitted to or acquired by a healthcare provider. The physician-patient privilege statute does not prohibit a district court from issuing an order granting the State’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on MN: Physician-patient privilege doesn’t exempt medical records from SW

E.D.Va.: WaPo SW: gov’t squandered deference by failing to cite Privacy Protection Act

WaPo reporter search warrant: The government failed to even acknowledge the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 in its warrant application. “The government’s conduct has disturbed that baseline posture of deference” that it always gets. In re Search of the Real … Continue reading →

Posted in Privileges, Warrant execution | Comments Off on E.D.Va.: WaPo SW: gov’t squandered deference by failing to cite Privacy Protection Act

W.D.Okla.: Def bears no burden on applying crime-fraud exception to his cell phone search

The government seized this Oklahoman’s cell phone and searched it with a warrant. Oklahoma is largely marijuana legal. Pleading the crime-fraud exception, the government bears the burden of segregating the valid conversations from the federal conspiracy allegations. Defendant bears no … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of proof, Cell phones, Plain view, feel, smell, Privileges, Probable cause, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on W.D.Okla.: Def bears no burden on applying crime-fraud exception to his cell phone search

S.D.N.Y.: No REP in what is shared with a cloud AI program

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in what is shared with a cloud AI program, even if it’s in anticipation of litigation. Therefore, no attorney-client privilege in what the client shares with AI trying to help his attorney. United … Continue reading →

Posted in AI, Apparent authority, Computer and cloud searches, Emergency / exigency, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: No REP in what is shared with a cloud AI program

ID: There is no legal privilege in pharmacy records

There is no legal privilege in pharmacy records. Pharmacists are independent actors in the medical field. The trial court erred in granting a motion in limine. Just because a psychotherapist prescribed a drug isn’t privileged. State v. Borek, 2026 Ida. … Continue reading →

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on ID: There is no legal privilege in pharmacy records