Category Archives: Abstention

CA11: Without Carpenter having already been made retroactive, it can’t support a successor habeas

Without Carpenter having already been made retroactive, it can’t support a successor habeas. In re Toth, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 29956 (11th Cir. Sept. 18, 2020). The record supports the district court’s conclusion defendant consented to the search of his … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Cell site location information | Comments Off on CA11: Without Carpenter having already been made retroactive, it can’t support a successor habeas

S.D.Cal.: 1983 suit against facts of detention barred by Younger abstention

Plaintiff’s claims in substantial part attack the facts of his current detention, and it’s barred by Younger abstention. Mondragon v. County of San Diego, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155166 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 26, 2020)*:

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: 1983 suit against facts of detention barred by Younger abstention

E.D.Wash.: Connecting seized cell phone to internet not a search

Connecting already seized cell phone to the internet was not shown to be a search (citing no law). United States v. Murray, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136292 (E.D. Wash. July 2, 2020). 2255 claim that defense counsel was ineffective for … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Ineffective assistance, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.Wash.: Connecting seized cell phone to internet not a search

WA: Private party returning property to def’s house per request was private searcher

The observations of a private person returning something to defendant’s dwelling for him were a private search. The police had nothing to do with it. State v. Lake, 2020 Wash. App. LEXIS 1925 (June 30, 2020).* Reasonable jurists would not … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Drug or alcohol testing, Private search | Comments Off on WA: Private party returning property to def’s house per request was private searcher

W.D.Tex.: State officer’s alleged 4A violation doesn’t permit removal of criminal case to federal court

Defendants removed their state criminal cases to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1443 based on claimed search and seizure issues. This isn’t a proper ground to remove, and they have a state law remedy. Texas v. Calzada, 2020 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Burden of pleading, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.Tex.: State officer’s alleged 4A violation doesn’t permit removal of criminal case to federal court

ND: Parole search of cell phone after def incarcerated reasonable

The parole search of defendant’s cell phone after he was incarcerated was valid. Here, the officers had reasonable suspicion. (The court saves for another day whether such a search without reasonable suspicion would be valid.) State v. Powley, 2020 ND … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on ND: Parole search of cell phone after def incarcerated reasonable

E.D.Pa.: FIPF is continuing offense and reasonable inference is firearm would be kept at home

Felon in possession of a firearm is a continuing offense, and it’s reasonable to infer defendant would keep the firearm he was suspected of having in his home. That’s sufficient for nexus. United States v. Golden, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Nexus, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: FIPF is continuing offense and reasonable inference is firearm would be kept at home

N.D.Ohio: The clear potential for violence in a volatile domestic disturbance was a continuing exigency

The clear potential for violence in a volatile domestic disturbance was exigency. “As is evident from the video, the exigency did not terminate due to the passage of time or as a result of [Off.] Sosenko’s attempts to manage the … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Emergency / exigency, Excessive force, Seizure | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: The clear potential for violence in a volatile domestic disturbance was a continuing exigency

CA11: § 1983 case can’t be used as substitute for state court appeal of a 4A claim

“Mr. Lynn does not raise a non-frivolous issue for appeal. Below, the District Court granted summary judgment to the defendant officers because it concluded Mr. Lynn’s Fourth Amendment claims were barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. … [¶] The District Court … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on CA11: § 1983 case can’t be used as substitute for state court appeal of a 4A claim

S.D.Ga.: Bodycam video shows homeowner’s consent to entry over guest’s gun was voluntary

The owner of the house, captured on a bodycam video, consented to a search of the house for a firearm that defendant, an overnight guest, allegedly brought into the house. United States v. McRae, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26680 (S.D. … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Consent, Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on S.D.Ga.: Bodycam video shows homeowner’s consent to entry over guest’s gun was voluntary

CA9: Sexual groping during a prison search states 4A excessive force claim

It was clearly established that groping a (transgender) woman during prison searches was unreasonable as excessive force. Goff v. Ramirez, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 4876 (9th Cir. Feb. 13, 2020). (The plaintiff being transgender had nothing to do with the … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Excessive force, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on CA9: Sexual groping during a prison search states 4A excessive force claim

CA6: FRCP 60(b) can’t be used to backdoor a successor habeas

Habeas petitioner’s attempt to use Rule 60(b) to attack the rejection of a Fourth Amendment claim was a backdoor successor habeas that doesn’t satisfy grounds for one. In re Henderson, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 4856 (6th Cir. Feb. 14, 2020)*:

Posted in Abstention, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on CA6: FRCP 60(b) can’t be used to backdoor a successor habeas

CA11: The Heck bar is to the cause of action; it isn’t jurisdictional

The Heck bar is to the cause of action; it isn’t jurisdictional. Teagan v. City of McDonough, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 4055 (11th Cir. Feb. 11, 2020):

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abstention | Comments Off on CA11: The Heck bar is to the cause of action; it isn’t jurisdictional

E.D.Mich.: Sole 4A question in § 2254 is fair opportunity to litigate, not correctness of result

Even an erroneous Fourth Amendment decision in state court does not overcome the Stone v. Powell bar in a § 2254. The question is the fair opportunity to litigate, not the result. Green v. Nagy, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16502 … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Sole 4A question in § 2254 is fair opportunity to litigate, not correctness of result

CA9: Vacated and dismissed case on post-conviction doesn’t invoke Heck bar

Three men convicted in Alaska state court got their convictions vacated and dismissed when someone else confessed to the crime. The lack of a criminal judgment rendered the Heck bar inapplicable. Roberts v. City of Fairbanks, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abstention | Comments Off on CA9: Vacated and dismissed case on post-conviction doesn’t invoke Heck bar

D.Utah: Defendant in prior dismissed federal action by state consumer protection agency refiled in state court won’t prevent state from using evidence obtained for that action

The state sued in federal court for relief, and it got a TRO, but the claim was later dismissed. Copies of records were made and originals returned. After the state sued in state court, the defendants sought application of the … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abstention, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.Utah: Defendant in prior dismissed federal action by state consumer protection agency refiled in state court won’t prevent state from using evidence obtained for that action