Category Archives: Admissibility of evidence

E.D.Pa.: State court’s suppression of evidence is a fact question for trial on underlying facts and findings and not preclusive

Plaintiff was charged in state court with possession, and the state court credited his version over that of the officers on the basis for the stop because their testimony was contradictory and confusing. Still, that doesn’t have preclusive effect in … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Admissibility of evidence, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: State court’s suppression of evidence is a fact question for trial on underlying facts and findings and not preclusive

ND: Evidence seized by SW still needs to comply with rules of evidence to be admissible

Just because evidence was seized with a search warrant doesn’t make it admissible. The rules of evidence or other statute or rule still have to be complied with. City of Fargo v. Hofer, 2020 ND 252, 2020 N.D. LEXIS 264 … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on ND: Evidence seized by SW still needs to comply with rules of evidence to be admissible

CA5: Def’s contesting authenticity of jail calls let the govt establish they came from jail

Not a search claim: Admission of jail telephone calls didn’t undermine the presumption of innocence. Defendant wouldn’t stipulate to authenticity so the government had to establish the source of the calls. United States v. Arayatanon, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 35922 … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Motion to suppress, Prison and jail searches, Waiver | Comments Off on CA5: Def’s contesting authenticity of jail calls let the govt establish they came from jail

CA5: GFE question is reasonableness of executing officer’s belief in PC

The district court erred in finding that the search warrant here was bare bones and that the good faith exception did not apply. There was a factual basis from which a reasonable officer would conclude there was probable cause. “But, … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Good faith exception, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on CA5: GFE question is reasonableness of executing officer’s belief in PC

OH8: Denial of cross-examination over affidavit for SW was harmless here

Officer’s statement in affidavit was assumed to be subject to cross-examination for impeachment purposes, but it was harmless error here. State v. Butts, 2020-Ohio-5011, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 3843 (8th Dist. Oct. 22, 2020).* [Note: a new § 60.57 on … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Probable cause | Comments Off on OH8: Denial of cross-examination over affidavit for SW was harmless here

AR: Video of arrest wasn’t claimed below to be a const’l claim, so it’s waived

Defendant sought to suppress the video of his arrest where he held a knife to his throat but he cited nothing for the Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendment, but he did cite Rule 403. The state argued it was evidence … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Arrest or entry on arrest, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Video of arrest wasn’t claimed below to be a const’l claim, so it’s waived

FL4: SW of def’s cell phone authenticated text messages

After a search warrant produced defendant’s text messages, the state was able to authenticate them by the phone. State v. Torres, 2020 Fla. App. LEXIS 14356 (Fla. 4th DCA Oct. 7, 2020). “In addition, ‘[d]uring a valid traffic stop, officers … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Cell phones, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on FL4: SW of def’s cell phone authenticated text messages

TX6: SW affidavit not admissible at trial

Defendant was prejudiced by admission of the search warrant and affidavit for it over defense objection. When defendant testified he was asked about all his porn, adult and apparent less than adult. [Why did he testify knowing that was coming?] … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on TX6: SW affidavit not admissible at trial

OK: False name given during execution of SW admissible to impeach credibility

“The State’s questions about Appellant having given a false name to authorities during the execution of a search warrant earlier in the summer of 2015 was relevant as a general matter to impeach Appellant’s credibility.” Knapper v. State, 2020 OK … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine, Seizure | Comments Off on OK: False name given during execution of SW admissible to impeach credibility

D.Minn.: Two SWs on consecutive days were part of same investigation so they aren’t severed for trial

Two search warrants on consecutive days produced drug counts against defendant. They are part of the same investigation, so they are joined for trial. United States v. Martin, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141845 (D. Minn. July 6, 2020). Ineffective assistance … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Two SWs on consecutive days were part of same investigation so they aren’t severed for trial

CA11: A cell phone with 2kg of heroin and cash is PC for the phone

“[L]aw enforcement officers had probable cause to obtain a warrant to search the cell phone because it was found in a truck with two kilograms of heroin and $24,000 of loose currency during the investigation into the heroin-distribution conspiracy.” CoA … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Cell phones, Ineffective assistance, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA11: A cell phone with 2kg of heroin and cash is PC for the phone

CA5: Expert opinion on reasonableness in 1983 case improper

“We first find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding portions of testimony from two of Albert’s expert witnesses—Richard Lichten, a police-procedure expert, and Dr. Kris Sperry, the former Chief Medical Examiner for the State of … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Admissibility of evidence | Comments Off on CA5: Expert opinion on reasonableness in 1983 case improper

W.D.N.Y.: Exigency usually applies in seizure of computer for CP

“Given that the Defendant admitted that he had used the laptop to view child pornography previously, it appears beyond dispute that Couch had such probable cause. … [¶] Defendant instead argues that the Government failed to prove that an exigent … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Exigency usually applies in seizure of computer for CP

TN: Motion to suppress wasn’t decided but state didn’t offer evidence at trial until defense opened the door; admitted as 404(b)

The state sought a search warrant for cell phones and then lost the product before trial. They still had the phones and looked again without a warrant just before trial. Defendant moved to suppress but argued that the phones weren’t … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Cell phones | Comments Off on TN: Motion to suppress wasn’t decided but state didn’t offer evidence at trial until defense opened the door; admitted as 404(b)

NE: Typographical error on date in SW application can be overlooked if apparent it’s wrong

A typographical error in the date of the application for search warrant could be overlooked where the actual date can be determined from the whole. State v. Benson, 305 Neb. 949 (May 29, 2020). Defendant moved to suppress his DNA … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Probable cause, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on NE: Typographical error on date in SW application can be overlooked if apparent it’s wrong

TX13: Affidavit for SW shouldn’t have been admitted at trial, but it was harmless error as cumulative

The state conceded error that the affidavit for defendant’s blood search warrant should not have been admitted into evidence at trial. (Defendant objected to a paragraph of hearsay.) It was, however, harmless error and merely cumulative to what the officer … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on TX13: Affidavit for SW shouldn’t have been admitted at trial, but it was harmless error as cumulative