- Reason: ‘Everything Has Been Criminalized,’ Says Neil Gorsuch as He Pushes for Stronger Fourth Amendment Protections
- PA: With MMJ, smell of MJ alone isn’t PC for search of a car; more required
- GA: Contraband in plain view on def’s property didn’t justify warrantless entry to seize it
- W.D.Wash.: iCloud SW temporal limit was impractical
- D.Nev.: “Seeming[ly] strategic activation and deactivation of the body camera” leads to finding of no consent
online since Feb. 24, 2003
WebPage Visits: real non-robot hits since 2010; approx. about 30,000 posts since 2003
Fourth Amendment cases,
citations, and links
Latest Slip Opinions:
U.S. Supreme Court (Home)
Federal Appellate Courts Opinions
FDsys, many district courts, other federal courts
Military Courts: C.A.A.F., Army, AF, N-M, CG, SF
State courts (and some USDC opinions)
Advanced Google Scholar
Google search tips
LII State Appellate Courts
LexisONE free caselaw
Findlaw Free Opinions
To search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $
S. Ct. Docket
Solicitor General's site
Briefs online (but no amicus briefs)
Oyez Project (NWU)
"On the Docket"–Medill
S.Ct. Monitor: Law.com
S.Ct. Com't'ry: Law.com
General (many free):
Google Scholar | Google
LexisOne Legal Website Directory
Lexis.com (criminal law/ 4th Amd) $
Findlaw.com (4th Amd)
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Resources
FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (2008) (pdf)
DEA Agents Manual (2002) (download)
DOJ Computer Search Manual (2009) (pdf)
Stringrays (ACLU No. Cal.) (pdf)
Congressional Research Service:
--Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012)
--Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012)
--Outline of Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012)
--Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012)
--Federal Laws Relating to Cybersecurity: Discussion of Proposed Revisions (2012)
ACLU on privacy
Electronic Frontier Foundation
NACDL’s Domestic Drone Information Center
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Criminal Appeal (post-conviction) (9th Cir.)
Section 1983 Blog
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't."
“I am still learning.”
—Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced."
—Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence."
—Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today."
— Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property."
—Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment."
—United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth."
—Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable."
—Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."
—Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
—United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.”
—United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need."
—Mick Jagger & Keith Richards
"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]
“You know, most men would get discouraged by now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!”"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime."
---Pepé Le Pew
—Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)
Website design by Wally Waller, Little Rock
Category Archives: Protective sweep
Facebook is not a government actor, even if NCMEC is under the Tenth Ciruit’s Ackerman. United States v. Sykes, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9580 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 19, 2021). 46 days from a child pornography download by the government to … Continue reading
The entry here could not be justified as a protective sweep because of a lack of reason to believe the person sought was there. It also can’t be justified by exigency because of the smell of burning marijuana alone. Nothing … Continue reading
The consenter’s uncertainty that defendant was alone in the apartment justified a protective sweep, and ultimately she consented and the evidence supports that conclusion. United States v. Phyfier, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 133 (11th Cir. Jan. 5, 2021). [Even so, … Continue reading
TX3: No “sua sponte duty” in trial court to suppress evidence that the defense didn’t move to suppress
The trial court has no “sua sponte duty” to suppress evidence that the defense didn’t move to suppress. Chila v. State, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 10219 (Tex. App. – Austin Dec. 23, 2020). Police along with USMs entered defendant’s place … Continue reading
Defendant was under a DV order of protection and repeatedly attempted to recover firearms from the police department, and that was probable cause for a warrant for his house. United States v. Bachler, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 39772 (8th Cir. … Continue reading
W.D.La.: Protective sweep for AK-47 was reasonable on knock-and-talk for weapon, denial of entry, and smelling MJ; one officer was to leave for SW
Police properly conducted a protective sweep for an AK-47 after a knock-and-talk did not gain entry. Police had an anonymous source, and defendant was an alleged felon in possession, and they went for a knock-and-talk. Defendant refused to consent, and … Continue reading
Defendant had no standing to challenge the seizure of an aborted fetus’s DNA that connected him to the pregnancy. Sharp v. State, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 9025 (Tex. App. – Amarillo Nov. 17, 2020). Officers had an arrest warrant for … Continue reading
Protective sweep of house for gun inside was unreasonable where defendant was arrested outside. State v. Radel, 2020 N.J. Super. LEXIS 222 (Oct. 20, 2020):
Police froze and surrounded defendant’s home while they sought a search warrant. While they were waiting, a gunshot came from within, so they entered in response. The government satisfied inevitable discovery even though this protective sweep ended up in the … Continue reading
While protective sweep was unreasonable, excising it from the affidavit for search warrant, still leaves probable cause. United States v. Lee, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171270 (E.D. N.C. Sept. 18, 2020). “In sum, counsel reasonably could have concluded that movant … Continue reading
Defendant’s arrest in a motel room resulted in a plain view of a distinctive sneaker that was probably worn in a robbery. That supported a search warrant. Defendant’s protective sweep argument wasn’t timely raised, but it would lose anyway because … Continue reading
M.D.Pa.: Govt’s justification for protective sweep or exigency based entry were speculative so motion to suppress granted
The government contention a protective sweep or exigent circumstances justified the entry was speculative and lacked foundation. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Lara-Mejia, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156946 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 28, 2020). The automobile exception doesn’t apply … Continue reading
An arrest outside a house, depending on the circumstances, can justify a protective sweep as much as an arrest inside. Defendant also claimed that a secondary protective sweep was unreasonably intense. Even if it was, it doesn’t affect the search … Continue reading