Category Archives: Issue preclusion

MS: The CIs were co-conspirators and eyewitnesses and could be credited

The three informants were co-conspirators, eyewitnesses, and participants in the crime, and their information could be credited for search warrant. Taylor v. State, 2025 Miss. App. LEXIS 292 (Aug. 12, 2025). Defendant’s 2255 re-raises his Fourth Amendment claim already rejected. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Excessive force, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MS: The CIs were co-conspirators and eyewitnesses and could be credited

W.D.N.Y.: No exigency shown for warrantless domestic entry

Based on the complaint, there were no exigent circumstances justifying the warrantless entry into the home for a domestic disturbance that had calmed way down before police got there. Intertwined is the qualified immunity claim, and there’s not enough here … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: No exigency shown for warrantless domestic entry

CA7: Lifting mattress during protective sweep here wasn’t justified

The protective sweep under a mattress here was unjustified. Protective sweeps have to be based on known facts, not theories. Here, without deciding whether it was justified, on this record, lifting a mattress was unreasonable. There was no reason to … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Issue preclusion, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: Lifting mattress during protective sweep here wasn’t justified

CA8: Social media video of SW target shooting guns justified no-knock entry

Social media videos of a target of the warrant shooting guns viewed before obtaining the warrant justified a no-knock warrant. Davenport v. City of Little Rock, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 16540 (8th Cir. July 7, 2025). Plaintiff’s various claims, including … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion, Knock and announce | Comments Off on CA8: Social media video of SW target shooting guns justified no-knock entry

E.D.Wis.: Heck bar has to be pled in first defensive pleading

The Heck bar is an affirmative defense that has to be pled by defendants under F.R.C.P. 8(c). Megna v. Musial, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127980 (E.D. Wis. July 7, 2025). Defendant’s driving justified his stop. State v. Craven, 2025 Wash. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Heck bar has to be pled in first defensive pleading

N.D.Ill.: Particularity is a function of what’s known

“That said, specificity is ‘relative,’ and a warrant ‘need not be more specific than knowledge allows.’ United States v. Bishop, 910 F.3d 335, 338 (7th Cir. 2018). In other words, law enforcement is required to particularize a warrant only to … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Particularity, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ill.: Particularity is a function of what’s known

S.D.Ohio: Casting state court’s failure to follow 4A precedent more closely as a due process violation still Stone barred

2254 petitioner’s due process claim that the state court denied due process by not following precedent was barred by Stone. Allen v. Warden, SE. Corr. Inst., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104131 (S.D. Ohio June 2, 2025). Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell, Private search, Probable cause | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Casting state court’s failure to follow 4A precedent more closely as a due process violation still Stone barred

CA6: Change in protective sweep argument between district court and appeal was waiver

Defendant’s protective sweep argument changed from the district court to appeal, so the argument urged here is waived. Below he argued the protective sweep was unreasonably extended but here it’s whether it should have occurred at all. United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Protective sweep, Seizure, Waiver | Comments Off on CA6: Change in protective sweep argument between district court and appeal was waiver

D.N.J.: Franks motion fails where a warrant exception applies

Defendant’s Franks motion fails because the government can justify a warrantless search of the vehicle under the automobile exception. United States v. Childs, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101370 (D.N.J. May 28, 2025). Plaintiff’s false arrest claim isn’t barred by Heck, … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Reasonableness, Seizure | Comments Off on D.N.J.: Franks motion fails where a warrant exception applies

TX5: No standing in a house where def under a no contact order to stay out

Defendant had no standing to contest the search of a house he was under a no contact order to stay away from. Yet, he was found there. Coggins v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 3587 (Tex. App. – Dallas May … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Independent source, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on TX5: No standing in a house where def under a no contact order to stay out

M.D.Fla.: Incomplete PC showing here was essentially knowing, so motion to suppress granted

The police here presented incomplete probable cause here that a phone call could have corrected. Since the officer knew it (and that probable cause might be lacking) and said he was charging defendant anyway, the motion to suppress the automobile … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion, Probable cause | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Incomplete PC showing here was essentially knowing, so motion to suppress granted

D.Neb.: Suits against parole board also subject to Heck bar

Suits against parole board members about parole issues are subject to the Heck bar. Also, “Parole board members are absolutely immune from suit, in their individual capacities, when considering and deciding parole questions. Figg v. Russell, 433 F.3d 593, 598 … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Neb.: Suits against parole board also subject to Heck bar

FL1: Judge issuing SW not barred from presiding over trial

Reviewing search warrant applications is a core function of a judicial officer, and that does not qualify as an improper ex parte communication requiring the trial judge to recuse. Writ of prohibition denied. Adelson v. State, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Neutral and detached magistrate, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on FL1: Judge issuing SW not barred from presiding over trial

W.D.Wash.: Corroborated anonymous tip was enough for probation search

An anonymous tip “here predicted Dodd would engage in future criminal activity and the tipster explained how they knew this information. Bullard then investigated these claims and learned new, non-public information that corroborated many of the allegations.” This was “reasonable … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: Corroborated anonymous tip was enough for probation search

CA3: Nodding yes to a request to search was consent

Defendant’s nodding yes to a request to search was consent to search the car. The officers might have believed he didn’t have standing since he was a mere passenger at the time. He didn’t mention facts supporting standing until at … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Consent, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA3: Nodding yes to a request to search was consent

E.D.Mo.: Carpenter does not protect ISP information

Carpenter creates no protection for ISP subscriber information. No Due Process rights were violated though a § 1509 summons. United States v. Meyrand, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84060 (E.D. Mo. May 2, 2025).* This court declined to abandon the automobile … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Issue preclusion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Surveillance technology, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: Carpenter does not protect ISP information

S.D.Cal.: Second look at computer for CP based on court order was reasonable and in good faith

Defendant’s computer was seized and searched for child pornography. After the initial warrant, the government applied for permission to reexamine the computer media. The second look was justified, and the good faith exception applies because it involves reliance on a … Continue reading

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Good faith exception, Issue preclusion, Scope of search | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: Second look at computer for CP based on court order was reasonable and in good faith

W.D.La.: Product of uncharged search of house comes in under 404(b)

Defendant was indicted for possession of drugs in a storage unit, but drugs and cash were also found in his house. That can come in under 404(b). United States v. Harris, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75696 (W.D. La. Apr. 21, … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on W.D.La.: Product of uncharged search of house comes in under 404(b)

S.D.N.Y.: SW affidavit differs from crime in indictment such that court grants Franks hearing

Because the affidavit for search warrant differs so much from the ultimate crime defendants were charged with, defendant at least gets a Franks hearing. There’s some suggestion of materiality, but that’s not decided yet. United States v. Peraire-Bueno, 2025 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: SW affidavit differs from crime in indictment such that court grants Franks hearing

CA6: Ptf’s § 1983 case over his traffic stop and tickets barred by Younger

Plaintiff was ticketed by officers of the Kirkland PD, one for having a fictitious license plate, and he sued in federal court claiming Fourth Amendment and right to travel violations and the city had no jurisdiction over him. Younger bars … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Mail and packages, Standing | Comments Off on CA6: Ptf’s § 1983 case over his traffic stop and tickets barred by Younger