Category Archives: Issue preclusion

CA10: No REP against officer running an LPN

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a license plate number. Officers can run any LPN number. They can also walk up to his car in his driveway and look at it. Becerra v. City of Albuquerque, 2023 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion, Staleness | Comments Off on CA10: No REP against officer running an LPN

D.Alaska: Admin. inspections of intrastate goldmines are legal under Mine Safety and Health Act

The Mine Safety and Health Administration sought an inspection of the respondent goldmine based on safety complaints it had received. The Fourth Amendment does not require an administrative warrant for an inspection. “Regulatory inspections pursuant to the Mine Act are … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Issue preclusion, Roadblocks | Comments Off on D.Alaska: Admin. inspections of intrastate goldmines are legal under Mine Safety and Health Act

N.D.Ala.: 4A does not require gun seen in protective sweep be immediately seized; SW was obtained

If officers saw defendant’s .22 during a protective sweep, the Fourth Amendment doesn’t require that it be seized immediately. It can be seized during execution of the later issued search warrant. A .22 is not a weapon of choice for … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: 4A does not require gun seen in protective sweep be immediately seized; SW was obtained

S.D.N.Y.: Arrested target of cell phone SW has common law right of access to affidavit and SW

The target’s motion to unseal the search warrant affidavit for his cell phone is granted. There is a common law right of access, and the First Amendment right of access does not even have to be decided. The government’s only … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell, Warrant papers | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Arrested target of cell phone SW has common law right of access to affidavit and SW

M.D.Pa.: State law jurisdiction of the officers involved isn’t cognizable in a 2254

State law jurisdiction of the officers involved isn’t cognizable in a 2254. McDowell v. Hainesworth, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187496 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 18, 2023). Petitioner doesn’t get a CoA to appeal his 2255. He provides no basis for concluding … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity, Tracking warrant | Comments Off on M.D.Pa.: State law jurisdiction of the officers involved isn’t cognizable in a 2254

E.D.Wis.: Text and Facebook messages about crime justified warrant for them

In a health care fraud case, the government knew that messages about the crime were exchanged by text and Facebook, and that was sufficient to get a search warrant for them. In any event, the good faith exception applied. United … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Particularity, Social media warrants | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Text and Facebook messages about crime justified warrant for them

CA11: Pretext for a criminal search can be an issue in administrative searches

Pretext for a criminal search can be an issue in administrative searches. “Accordingly, the district court erred in failing to recognize the existence of a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the February 2015 administrative search was focused … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Excessive force, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on CA11: Pretext for a criminal search can be an issue in administrative searches

CA7: Restating 4A claim doesn’t satisfy successor habeas standard

A restated Fourth Amendment claim doesn’t satisfy the standard for a successor 2254 petition. Hardy v. Neal, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 25343 (7th Cir. Sep. 25, 2023). Plaintiff fails in his claim the county routinely violates the Fourth Amendment in … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: Restating 4A claim doesn’t satisfy successor habeas standard

M.D.Fla.: Defense counsel was ineffective for not raising valid suppression issue that would have reduced Guideline range below life

Defense counsel at trial was ineffective for not raising a suppression issue that would likely have prevailed and taken defendant from a life sentence down to a 20 year MM. United States v. Dasinger, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168974 (M.D. … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Defense counsel was ineffective for not raising valid suppression issue that would have reduced Guideline range below life

N.D.Okla.: Video doesn’t support officer’s claim of excessive nervousness

The court does not credit the officer’s claim that defendant was excessively nervous to the point of stuttering during the stop in the officer’s effort to show reasonable suspicion. It appears to the court from the video to be no … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.Okla.: Video doesn’t support officer’s claim of excessive nervousness

N.D.Iowa: Drug dog breaking plane of the car window is a trespass and entry without PC

The drug dog broke the plane of the window, and that’s a trespass. There was no probable cause at that point, and the R&R is rejected. The motion to suppress is granted. United States v. Buescher, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion, Trespass | Comments Off on N.D.Iowa: Drug dog breaking plane of the car window is a trespass and entry without PC

MN: CI’s successful track record supports reliability

The court reiterates that a CI’s successful track record supports his reliability. State v. Mosley, 2023 Minn. LEXIS 451 (Sep. 6, 2023). The exclusionary rule does not apply to supervised release violations. Defendant’s panicking to a felony arrest was “not … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on MN: CI’s successful track record supports reliability

ME: State constitutional arguments must be developed; citing it not enough

(1) The tracking device placed on defendant’s vehicle by court order was with probable cause. (2) “For a claim under the Maine Constitution to be deemed preserved for our review, however, the party advancing the claim cannot merely allude to … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Seizure, State constitution, Warrant execution | Comments Off on ME: State constitutional arguments must be developed; citing it not enough

CA6: Officer parking next to def’s car was not a seizure

Police parking next to a defendant’s car is not a seizure. United States v. Gartrell, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22719 (6th Cir. Aug. 28, 2023). Covid limitations on visitation at a small hospital wasn’t a Fourth Amendment violation, among other … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause, Seizure | Comments Off on CA6: Officer parking next to def’s car was not a seizure

CA5: Arrest of ptf for social media joke about police violated 1A and 4A

Defendant officer’s arrest of plaintiff for terrorizing under state law for a social media post joke about the police violated clearly established law and violated the First Amendment, too. Bailey v. Iles, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22503 (5th Cir. Aug. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA5: Arrest of ptf for social media joke about police violated 1A and 4A

OH4: Franks challenge seven years after motion to suppress denied by res judicata

There was a motion to suppress denied at trial. “Now, seven years later appellant seeks to file a motion to suppress and a motion for a Franks hearing. We believe, however, that the trial court correctly concluded that res judicata … Continue reading

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Good faith exception, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Waiver | Comments Off on OH4: Franks challenge seven years after motion to suppress denied by res judicata

W.D.Okla.: Broad challenges to how ptf was investigated all barred by Heck

“Many of Plaintiff’s alleged violations attack the procedures used to investigate and charge him, the evidence used to convict him, as well as the constitutionality of the first-degree murder statute under which he was convicted. Success on some of these … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on W.D.Okla.: Broad challenges to how ptf was investigated all barred by Heck

“There is no ‘inadvertent negligence’ exception to [Stone v.] Powell.

“More to the point, however, is the irrelevance of any officer negligence in this habeas corpus case. Stone v. Powell bars habeas corpus consideration of Fourth Amendment claims as a basis for habeas relief. There is no ‘inadvertent negligence’ exception … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Nexus, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on “There is no ‘inadvertent negligence’ exception to [Stone v.] Powell.

MI: Omission def was a CI was not material where SW was based on possession and sale of drugs

“Agent Merle’s failure to reveal that Brown was a CI for DTF was not a material omission. As discussed previously, the warrant affidavit was based on Brown’s possession and sale of illegal drugs, which did not fall within the scope … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MI: Omission def was a CI was not material where SW was based on possession and sale of drugs

S.D.Ohio: Federal suit to force state court to apply exclusionary rule barred by Younger and Rooker/Feldman

Plaintiff’s suit in federal court to cause state court to apply the exclusionary rule in state court is barred by Younger and Rooker/Feldman. Chappel v. Adams Cnty. Child.’s Servs., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112877 (S.D. Ohio May 19, 2023). Defendant’s … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Federal suit to force state court to apply exclusionary rule barred by Younger and Rooker/Feldman