Category Archives: Exclusionary rule

N.D.Cal.: Search of car violated Rodriguez and product of that search led to suppression of SW for house

Defendant’s stop was unreasonably prolonged and violated Rodriguez. The product of that search was used to get a search warrant for the house. The search of the house is suppressed, too. United States v. Maffei, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177755 … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Seizure | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Search of car violated Rodriguez and product of that search led to suppression of SW for house

Cal.2: The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in PC determations for arrest; that’s to be litigated later

At a probable cause determination, the legality of the arrest for an attempt at applying the exclusionary rule isn’t appropriately litigated. That comes after the charges land in Superior Court. Barajas v. Appellate Div. of the Superior Court, 2019 Cal. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on Cal.2: The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in PC determations for arrest; that’s to be litigated later

KS applies Krull for GFE to statutory DUI advice of rights later held unconstitutional

The officer gave advice of DUI rights as required by state law later held unconstitutional. Under Illinois v. Krull, the court finds the officer acted in good faith, and the BAC test is not suppressed. State v. Perkins, 2019 Kan. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception | Comments Off on KS applies Krull for GFE to statutory DUI advice of rights later held unconstitutional

E.D.N.Y.: Given a 4A violation for lack of particularity, subjective good faith isn’t good enough for GFE

There was a failure of particularity in this document search warrant, which the government effectively concedes, and it falls back to the good faith exception to save it. The court concludes, however, in a long analysis, that the deterrent benefits … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Particularity | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Given a 4A violation for lack of particularity, subjective good faith isn’t good enough for GFE

D.V.I.: Failure to include limiting attachments at time of execution of SW was 4A violation, but mere oversight and exclusionary rule not applied

The search warrant had the wrong address, but there were attachments to it when presented to the USMJ which gave the correct address. In addition, the affiant was familiar with the place to be searched, and he went along on … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Particularity | Comments Off on D.V.I.: Failure to include limiting attachments at time of execution of SW was 4A violation, but mere oversight and exclusionary rule not applied

FL4: Mistakenly placed GPS on probationer isn’t suppressed under Heien and Herring

When defendant started probation, a GPS monitor was placed on him without court order by a probation employee that just assumed it was required. It wasn’t. It was an apparent violation of the Fourth Amendment, but it’s within the Heien … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, GPS / Tracking Data | Comments Off on FL4: Mistakenly placed GPS on probationer isn’t suppressed under Heien and Herring

NY4: Exclusionary rule wouldn’t be applied to probation search during a time of uncertainty in the law where law now settled; no deterrence possible

The exclusionary rule would not be applied to what turned out to be an illegal probation search at a time when the law was unclear. There is no deterrent effect to be gained by applying the exclusionary rule when other … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probation / Parole search, Warrant execution | Comments Off on NY4: Exclusionary rule wouldn’t be applied to probation search during a time of uncertainty in the law where law now settled; no deterrence possible

CA3: Petrs stated enough to get an immigration hearing on application of exclusionary rule to race-based stop as egregious violation of 4A

The petitioners in an immigration proceeding alleged a race based stop and detention by state officers stated enough to get a hearing on whether this was an egregious violation of the Fourth Amendment. Yoc-Us v. AG United States, 2019 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Pretext | Comments Off on CA3: Petrs stated enough to get an immigration hearing on application of exclusionary rule to race-based stop as egregious violation of 4A

S.D.W.Va.: Computer SW for drugs led to healthcare fraud evidence; second SW needed; exclusionary rule should apply to deter

The government had a search warrant of ESI for drugs. When the search warrant was executed, they found evidence of healthcare billing fraud. A second search warrant was required, citing the government’s own search manual [noted and linked on the … Continue reading

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Overseizure | Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: Computer SW for drugs led to healthcare fraud evidence; second SW needed; exclusionary rule should apply to deter

N.D.Ill.: The exclusionary rule does not apply in a § 1983 suit against police officers

The exclusionary rule does not apply in a § 1983 suit against police officers. Mayo v. Lasalle County, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117667 (N.D. Ill. July 15, 2019).* The court concludes defendant didn’t just drop his backpack when confronted by … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on N.D.Ill.: The exclusionary rule does not apply in a § 1983 suit against police officers

TX14: The exclusionary rule does not apply to drug testing in a termination of parental rights case

The exclusionary rule does not apply to drug testing in a termination of parental rights case. In the Interest of L.C.L., 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 6018 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) July 16, 2019). The smell of marijuana during … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Plain view, feel, smell, Private search | Comments Off on TX14: The exclusionary rule does not apply to drug testing in a termination of parental rights case

D.P.R.: Officer opened def’s door without PC or consent; suppressed

Officer’s opening defendant’s door without probable cause or voluntary consent requires suppression of weapons found inside. (The USMJ conducted a hearing and the USDJ had doubts about some facts and conducted another one.) United States v. Figueroa-Figueroa, 2019 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Exclusionary rule, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Officer opened def’s door without PC or consent; suppressed