Archives
-
Recent Posts
- CA7: False confession claim is a 4A not 14A claim
- CA5: RS required of weapons or contraband for search of vagina
- CA4: Affidavit for SW provided neither nexus nor timing and even failed GFE
- CA9: Ptfs didn’t meet burden of showing administrative subpoena was 4A violation or in bad faith
- CA2: No 4A requirement for SWs being issued with notice to target
-
-
ABA Journal Web 100, Best Law Blogs (2015-17) (then discontinued)
-
-
by John Wesley Hall
Criminal Defense Lawyer and
Search and seizure law consultant
Little Rock, Arkansas
Contact: forhall @ aol.com
Search and Seizure (6th ed. 2025)
www.johnwesleyhall.com -
© 2003-26,
online since Feb. 24, 2003 Approx. 600,000 visits (non-robot) since 2012 Approx. 50,000 posts since 2003 (29,000 on WordPress as of 12/31/25) -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fourth Amendment cases, citations, and links -
Latest Slip Opinions:
U.S. Supreme Court (Home)
S.Ct. Shadow Docket Database
Federal Appellate Courts Opinions
First Circuit
Second Circuit
Third Circuit
Fourth Circuit
Fifth Circuit
Sixth Circuit
Seventh Circuit
Eighth Circuit
Ninth Circuit
Tenth Circuit
Eleventh Circuit
D.C. Circuit
Federal Circuit
Foreign Intell.Surv.Ct.
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)
Google Scholar
Advanced Google Scholar
Google search tips
LexisWeb
LII State Appellate Courts
LexisONE free caselaw
Findlaw Free Opinions
To search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $ -
Research Links:
Supreme Court:
SCOTUSBlog
S. Ct. Docket
Solicitor General's site
SCOTUSreport
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):
LexisWeb
Google Scholar | Google
LexisOne Legal Website Directory
Crimelynx
Lexis.com $
Lexis.com (criminal law/ 4th Amd) $
Findlaw.com
Findlaw.com (4th Amd)
Westlaw.com $
F.R.Crim.P. 41
www.fd.org
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
Privacy Foundation
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."
—Me -
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well."
–Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others) -
“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 -
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848) -
"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, Let it Bleed (album, 1969) -
"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] -
“Children grow up thinking the adult world is ordered, rational, fit for purpose. It’s crap. Becoming a man is realising that it’s all rotten. Realising how to celebrate that rottenness, that’s freedom.”
– John le Carré, The Night Manager (1993), line by Richard Roper -
"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."
—Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948) -
The book was dedicated in the first (1982) and sixth (2025) editions to Justin William Hall (1975-2025). He was three when this project started in 1978.
Website design by Wally Waller, Colorado Springs. 
Category Archives: Consent
AZ: Non-consensual blood draw DUI provision is unconstitutional as applied, but the Davis GFE applies
Non-consensual blood draw DUI provision is unconstitutional as applied, but the Davis good faith exception applies here. Defendant was airlifted to a Nevada hospital for the blood draw. The trial court didn’t make findings on whether Nevada or Arizona law … Continue reading →
W.D.Mo.: Def’s primary language wasn’t English but he also spoke Spanish, and his reading aloud the consent form showed he understood it
Defendant was found to have consented. His primary language was Portuguese because he was from Brazil. He also spoke Spanish and he read aloud the Spanish consent form. United States v. Dacruz-Mendes, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30094 (W.D. Mo. Jan. … Continue reading →
E.D.N.C.: Officers first said they were from Publishers’ Clearinghouse, then said “open the door or we are going to knock it down.” Consent after that was valid
Officers first knocked at door saying they were with Publishers’ Clearinghouse, but defendant didn’t come to door. Then they said in Spanish “open the door or we are going to knock it down.” It was on body camera. On the … Continue reading →
ME: Def’s mere acquiescence to his blood draw was not consent
Defendant’s mere acquiescence in his blood draw was not consent, and the trial court’s suppression order is affirmed. Implied consent no longer exists by statute, and the state had to prove consent. The trial court held that it did not, … Continue reading →
D.N.J.: “including but not limited to” in SW was not overbroad; it had to be read in context
A search warrant with a particularity clause of “including but not limited to” was not overbroad and had to be read in context of the preceding language. United States v. Schaffer, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26257 (D.N.J. Feb. 24, 2017).* … Continue reading →
OR: Telling def to let out dogs so police could search his house was not his consent
The officers showed up to search defendant’s house and told him that he could let his dogs out or they would do it before the search. His letting the dogs out wasn’t consent to the search. “Moreover, under the totality … Continue reading →
NE implied consent law was unconstitutional as applied here, but not on its face
“In this instance, without a warrant, nor exigent circumstance, the State could only rely upon the exception of a warrantless search incident to a lawful arrest for drunk driving in order to demand a blood test from McCumber. With the … Continue reading →
W.D.Mo.: The occupant’s stepping back from the door and opening it showed consent to enter to look for def
Officers could conclude that the occupant consented to entry when the police knocked and they said they were looking for somebody inside, and she backed away and opened the door more. United States v. McDaniel, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25372 … Continue reading →
DC: Def was stopped, name run, then his cigarette pack requested; not consensual
Officer’s stop of defendant, running his name for warrants, and then requesting his cigarette box was coercive and not consensual. Jones v. United States, 2017 D.C. App. LEXIS 17 (Feb. 23, 2017)*:
S.D.Tex.: Def persuades court his prior arrests led him to believe objecting to consent was futile; suppressed
Defendant successfully argues his prior experience with the criminal justice system led him to believe that objecting to consent was futile, and suppression is granted. United States v. Sanchez, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22807 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 17, 2017):
Cal.App.–Santa Clara: Even with implied consent, statute requires state carry burden of proof and they failed here
“After a thorough review of the record, which consists of undisputed facts pertaining to the motion, we hold that notwithstanding California’s implied consent law, which we recognize is a factor to be considered in the totality of the circumstances, the … Continue reading →
ID: Def consented to search of person and lifted shirt revealing baggie of MJ
Defendant consented to a search for weapons, and lifted his shirt, and the officer saw a baggie of marijuana sticking out of his pants. The view was valid, and the seizure did not exceed the scope of consent. State v. … Continue reading →
E.D.Mich.: Def’s frisk turned up no weapon; officer asked him to give up gun and he wouldn’t be prosecuted; consent coerced
Defendant was frisked and no weapon was found. The officer told him that if he gave up the gun he wouldn’t be prosecuted. He did, and that was a coerced consent and admission of the gun. Suppressed. United States v. … Continue reading →
GA on implied consent
The trial court properly granted the motion to suppress. The evidence showed that defendant was extremely intoxicated and confused during her encounter with the officer, and that supporting the conclusion that she did not voluntarily consent to the blood test, … Continue reading →
D.P.R.: Consent before Mirandizing is not a violation of self-incrimination
Obtaining consent before Mirandizing the defendant is not a violation of self-incrimination. Defendant’s experience with the criminal justice system supports the voluntariness of his consent. United States v. Lopez-Fernandez, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17791 (D. P.R. Feb. 6, 2017). Careless … Continue reading →
E.D.Ky.: Def asked for consent and lawyered up; officers looked at his gf and she consented; no Randolph violation
Officers spoke to defendant and he lawyered up. Then they turned to his girlfriend and talked to her getting consent. This was valid under Randolph. Defendant was right there and could have objected but didn’t. She had common authority to … Continue reading →
N.D.Ala.: One is not free to leave when officer retains his DL; otherwise, case is essentially a repeat of Strieff
A person is not free to leave when the officer retains his driver’s license. The officer’s conduct in detaining defendant here was no worse than in Strieff, and the finding of the arrest warrant would not be suppressed. United States … Continue reading →
NM: No proof of common authority for consent by an occasional visitor; state doesn’t recognize apparent authority
The evidence did not show the consenter had common authority, and New Mexico does not recognize apparent authority. The exception for protective sweep and the community caretaking function also didn’t apply because there was no bona fide need for either. … Continue reading →
WY also sees the Columbo-gambit: “you’re free to go but can I ask another question”
The state trooper here returned defendant’s paperwork to him and said to “have a nice day” and started back to the patrol car. But, he came back and asked if he could ask more questions. Even though the overhead lights … Continue reading →
NY4: State didn’t prove stop justified for consent given in an interview room 4½ hrs later
At the suppression hearing from this 2001 stop, defendant consented in an interview room 4½ hrs after the stop to an officer who had nothing to do with the stop. The state didn’t prove the consent by failing to call … Continue reading →