Category Archives: Issue preclusion

W.D.N.Y.: Just saying the Stone bar is “misplaced” isn’t an answer

“In his reply …, Petitioner asserts in conclusory fashion that Respondent’s application of Stone is ‘misplaced.’ … However, he fails to explain why this is so. Nor does he attempt to show that he did not have a ‘full and … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Just saying the Stone bar is “misplaced” isn’t an answer

WA: Officers didn’t have to check whether MJ grow was state licensed before they sought a SW

“We hold that when viewed together, the facts in the affidavit were sufficient to establish probable cause to search all four properties, regardless of the fact that the odor of marijuana was only detected at two of the properties. Further, … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Waiver | Comments Off on WA: Officers didn’t have to check whether MJ grow was state licensed before they sought a SW

W.D.Mo.: Prior ruling on motion to suppress before speedy trial dismissal was law of the case

Defendant lost a motion to suppress but won a speedy trial dismissal without prejudice. Reindicted, he filed another motion to suppress, but law of the case applies. United States v. Bell, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41924 (W.D. Mo. Mar. 7, … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Burden of pleading, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on W.D.Mo.: Prior ruling on motion to suppress before speedy trial dismissal was law of the case

CA10: Def’s “self-search” of his bag was consensual

At the Albuquerque Greyhound stop, defendant encountered DEA officers on the bus and ultimately opened his own bag and showed the contents. This “self-search” was consensual, and he was told he had a right to refuse. United States v. Jackson, … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on CA10: Def’s “self-search” of his bag was consensual

CA8: Walkway to front door where mailbox was wasn’t protected curtilage

Defendant’s front yard wasn’t curtilage where there was a walkway to the mailbox by the door. Blood spatter was visible. The officers then went through a fence based on exigency. The observations supported a warrant. United States v. McGhee, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on CA8: Walkway to front door where mailbox was wasn’t protected curtilage

OR: Cell phone warrant was sufficiently particular to prevent a general rummaging

For this cell phone search, “As explained above, however, the first and fourth search categories are sufficiently specific, and defendant conceded below that the third category is sufficiently specific. Further, the sixth category’s command to search for location information—as circumscribed … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Particularity | Comments Off on OR: Cell phone warrant was sufficiently particular to prevent a general rummaging

W.D.Ky.: Police battering ram to door and shots fired inside is a seizure

In the Brianna Taylor civil rights prosecution, the battering ram to the door of the apartment with shots being fired was a seizure of the occupants. United States v. Hankison, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29347 (W.D. Ky. Feb. 19, 2025).* … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Seizure, Standing, Warrant papers | Comments Off on W.D.Ky.: Police battering ram to door and shots fired inside is a seizure

S.D.N.Y.: Govt declines to use challenged evidence so it’s moot; def can reassert if need be

The government says it doesn’t intend to use challenged evidence, so the motion to suppress is moot. If the government changes its mind, defendant can reassert it. United States v. Combs, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25641 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2025).* … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Mootness, Waiver | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Govt declines to use challenged evidence so it’s moot; def can reassert if need be

W.D.Mich.: A motorist can be ordered from the car during a traffic stop

In 1977, 48 years ago, SCOTUS held in Pennsylvania v. Mimms that officers could order a motorist out of the car during a traffic stop, and that’s not unreasonable today. [We’re still seeing challenges to that for extending a stop … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.Mich.: A motorist can be ordered from the car during a traffic stop

S.D.Ohio: Stone bar applies regardless of the merits of the 4A claim

The Stone bar applies regardless of the merits of the Fourth Amendment claim. Wood v. Warden, Noble Corr. Inst., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24460 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 11, 2025).* Notice pleading in Fourth Amendment § 1983 claims: “Plaintiff alleges that … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Stone bar applies regardless of the merits of the 4A claim

CA9: Use of Taser in dart-mode wasn’t excessive force because it was justified

“An officer’s use of a Taser in dart-mode ‘constitute[s] an intermediate, significant level of force.’ … But under the Graham factors, Officer Swindling’s brief Taser use was justified under the circumstances. First, Sharif had assaulted his daughter’s mother; stolen a … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Particularity | Comments Off on CA9: Use of Taser in dart-mode wasn’t excessive force because it was justified

CA11: Potential new Franks violation not enough for third successor habeas

This is petitioner’s third successor habeas attempt. This one claims new information might make a Franks violation. Except that it doesn’t qualify for permission to proceed as a successor. In re Obeginski, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 2806 (11th Cir. Feb. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA11: Potential new Franks violation not enough for third successor habeas

CA9: Knock-and-announce failure doesn’t lead to suppression

Knock-and-announce failure doesn’t lead to suppression. United States v. Benlevi, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 2452 (9th Cir. Feb. 4, 2025). Police were called to a motel where a vehicle was illegally parked in a handicapped zone for an hour allegedly … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Knock and announce, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA9: Knock-and-announce failure doesn’t lead to suppression

TN: Ptf’s actions at DV call justified officers’ greater force

The totality of the circumstances, including the nature of the domestic violence call, appellant’s armed presence near the scene, his rapid movement towards the officers while armed, and the short timeframe, made the officers’ use of deadly force objectively reasonable … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Excessive force, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on TN: Ptf’s actions at DV call justified officers’ greater force

MS: Admitted “general crime control” roadblock still upheld based on part-time officer’s inexperience

While the officer in charge of the DL roadblock (highway safety) essentially admitted it was for general crime control (see Edmund v. City of Indianapolis), the court goes with the DUI arrest being valid. The officer “was the most inexperienced … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Roadblocks | Comments Off on MS: Admitted “general crime control” roadblock still upheld based on part-time officer’s inexperience

WA: Long on vehicle protective sweeps not overruled by Gant

Michigan v. Long on protective sweeps of vehicles when a weapon is reasonably feared was not overruled by Gant. State v. Howard, 2025 Wash. App. LEXIS 151 (Jan. 28, 2025). The protective sweep would have been invalid but for valid … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Protective sweep | Comments Off on WA: Long on vehicle protective sweeps not overruled by Gant

D.Ariz.: USPO can turn phone seized in supervised release over to FBI

It was not improper for the PO to turn defendant’s phone over to the FBI to search it when it was already lawfully seized. “This is not a stalking horse case.” The delay was not unreasonable. United States v. Fuller, … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: USPO can turn phone seized in supervised release over to FBI

CA9: Consent obtained by trickery is not voluntary

Consent obtained by trickery is not voluntary. United States v. Beland, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 1019 (9th Cir. Jan. 16, 2025). “[T]here is no indication from the record that the consent was in any way coerced, that Fiallos-Pena and Verganza … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Issue preclusion, Voluntariness | Comments Off on CA9: Consent obtained by trickery is not voluntary

E.D.Tenn.: The alleged illegality of the later arrest doesn’t undo def’s abandonment in flight

Defendant fled, he said, in fear of his life, not knowing that it was the police. He abandoned property in flight. The fact the later arrest might turn out to be invalid doesn’t undo the abandonment. United States v. Ross, … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Arrest or entry on arrest, Inventory, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: The alleged illegality of the later arrest doesn’t undo def’s abandonment in flight

CA1: Report of a dead body in a house for a day didn’t justify warrantless entry

The police entered defendant’s home on a report of a dead body inside. They knew, however, the person was dead at least a day and likely wasn’t inside the home by then. The emergency exception did not apply. United States … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on CA1: Report of a dead body in a house for a day didn’t justify warrantless entry