Category Archives: Search incident

E.D.Mich.: Gant didn’t bar a plain view of the interior of def’s car when he was handcuffed on ground

Defendant was arrested for drug dealing, and he was handcuffed on the ground near the car. The search of the car here was based on seeing a gun in the car in plain view, so Gant doesn’t bar the search. … Continue reading

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Gant didn’t bar a plain view of the interior of def’s car when he was handcuffed on ground

E.D.N.Y.: Def’s search incident of his backpack for fraudulent use of a Metrocard was valid at least on GFE and inevitable discovery

Defendant was stopped for using a school student’s Metrocard to get on the NYC subway because he looked and was a so older. His backpacked was removed, and he was handcuffed. His backpack was searched incident to his arrest. The … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Inevitable discovery, Inventory, Search incident | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Def’s search incident of his backpack for fraudulent use of a Metrocard was valid at least on GFE and inevitable discovery

OH7: Driving on a suspended license doesn’t justify search incident of the car

Driving on a suspended license does not justify a search incident of his vehicle. Even worse, however, there was no justification for the arrest anyway. He was interrogated while handcuffed and admitted that there was heroin in his shoe. There … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Search incident | Comments Off on OH7: Driving on a suspended license doesn’t justify search incident of the car

TX1: Search incident and inventory invalid for failing to signal; as to inventory, the inventorying officer is a necessary witness

A drug officer called a patrol officer to stop defendant. After he failed to promptly signal a turn, he was stopped, handcuffed, and his car was searched. “The search of Appellant’s vehicle incident to his arrest for failing to signal … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Inventory, Search incident | Comments Off on TX1: Search incident and inventory invalid for failing to signal; as to inventory, the inventorying officer is a necessary witness

LA5: A micro data storage card in defendant’s watch pocket could be seized incident to arrest

A micro data storage card in defendant’s watch pocket could be seized incident to arrest. It was then searched with a warrant. The informant was a victim, and thus didn’t need to be corroborated. “Knocking on a door does not … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Informant hearsay, Search incident | Comments Off on LA5: A micro data storage card in defendant’s watch pocket could be seized incident to arrest

CA10: GFE applied to cell phone SW in KS where phone was actually searched in MO

Search incident did not justify seizure of defendant’s cell phone when he was arrested because he’d been separated from the cell phone. The government’s claim that officers seizing the cell phone were proceeding under “direction of” defendant’s PO is rejected … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Search incident, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA10: GFE applied to cell phone SW in KS where phone was actually searched in MO

MN: Shoplifter placed stuff in her purse, and that made it subject to search incident

Defendant was observed shoplifting and put the allegedly stolen item into her purse. Outside, a struggle ensued, and defendant handed her purse off to another. It was subject to search incident because it was evidence [and an instrumentality] of the … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Search incident | Comments Off on MN: Shoplifter placed stuff in her purse, and that made it subject to search incident

SD: Search incident doctrine doesn’t apply to driver’s urine samples

A urine sample can’t be taken from a suspect incident to an arrest. Nothing about the search incident doctrine of officer safety and destruction of evidence applies to urine samples. State v. Lar, 2018 SD 18, 2018 S.D. LEXIS 26 … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Search incident | Comments Off on SD: Search incident doctrine doesn’t apply to driver’s urine samples

D.Kan.: Search of a small container on a key chain was reasonable as search incident

“Here, the officers’ search of the container attached to Mr. Nichols’s keys was within the time, control, and place constraints for the search of an arrestee’s personal property incident to arrest. Mr. Nichols had the keychain in his exclusive control … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Search incident | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Search of a small container on a key chain was reasonable as search incident

D.Nev.: Def was handcuffed and in police car, so search incident didn’t apply; it was inevitable, however, inventory would happen

Defendant’s arrest led to a search incident of luggage, but he was handcuffed and in a police car. So, the search incident doctrine can’t apply, but an inventory would have inevitably occurred, so that provides an independent basis for the … Continue reading

Posted in Independent source, Private search, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident, Seizure | Comments Off on D.Nev.: Def was handcuffed and in police car, so search incident didn’t apply; it was inevitable, however, inventory would happen

S.D.Ind.: SI of duffle bag at feet of handcuffed suspect reasonable when he wouldn’t answer questions about having gun

Search incident of defendant’s duffle bag was reasonable because, while handcuffed, his hands were relatively mobile around his waist and he refused to answer questions about whether he had a gun. United States v. Veach, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209971 … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Search incident | Comments Off on S.D.Ind.: SI of duffle bag at feet of handcuffed suspect reasonable when he wouldn’t answer questions about having gun

D.N.M.: A habeas claim the state court was wrong on the 4A issue isn’t grounds for relief

Petitioner’s argument “the state courts failed to apply a colorable application of the correct Fourth Amendment constitutional standards,” a “bold claim,” doesn’t overcome the Stone v. Powell bar. He did in fact litigate the Fourth Amendment claim in the state … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Search incident | Comments Off on D.N.M.: A habeas claim the state court was wrong on the 4A issue isn’t grounds for relief

MA: Search of vehicle outside territorial jurisdiction of officers was void; inevitable discovery rejected

The informant hearsay satisfied Aguilar-Spinneli and thus showed probable cause. The search incident of defendant’s person was thus justified. The search of a car in an adjoining town was unreasonable because there was no statutory authorization for it under state … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Reasonableness, Search incident | Comments Off on MA: Search of vehicle outside territorial jurisdiction of officers was void; inevitable discovery rejected

E.D.Mich.: Police officer’s presence at repossession doesn’t make it state action

A police officer’s presence at the scene of a vehicle repossession doesn’t turn an otherwise private action into a Fourth Amendment seizure. King v. Blackhawk Recovery & Investigations, LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198373 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 3, 2017). “As … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Search incident | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Police officer’s presence at repossession doesn’t make it state action

MD: With decrim of <10 g. MJ, officer doesn't have to be absolutely sure of quantity to have PC

“Despite the decriminalization of possession of less than ten grams of marijuana, a law enforcement officer who has reason to believe that an individual is in possession of marijuana has probable cause to effectuate an arrest, even if the officer … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Search incident | Comments Off on MD: With decrim of <10 g. MJ, officer doesn't have to be absolutely sure of quantity to have PC

TX13: Search incident can occur before formal arrest as long as both are justified

Search incident can occur before formal arrest as long as both are justified. Hill v. State, 2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 10749 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi – Edinburg, Nov. 16, 2017) (memorandum).* Appellant’s claims that VA attorneys hacked her computer … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Search incident | Comments Off on TX13: Search incident can occur before formal arrest as long as both are justified

LA: Search incident can occur before formal arrest

The trial court denied the motion to suppress and the court of appeals reversed. When defendant’s name came back as having a warrant, the fact the search occurred before the formal arrest doesn’t matter. State v. Owens, 2017 La. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Search incident | Comments Off on LA: Search incident can occur before formal arrest

NM: Backpack on def when he was arrested was subject to inventory even though he was separated from it when searched

Defendant’s backpack was on him when arrested, and it was still subject to police inventory for all the policies of inventory. State v. Davis, 2017 N.M. LEXIS 86 (Nov. 9, 2017), revg, 2016-NMCA-073, 387 P.3d 274 (posted here):

Posted in Inventory, Search incident | Comments Off on NM: Backpack on def when he was arrested was subject to inventory even though he was separated from it when searched

OH3: Search incident under Gant isn’t automatic in a DUI arrest; more indicators required

OVI (DUI) is not an offense where there is per se evidence to be found in the vehicle by search incident under Gant (or the automobile exception). Something more than just the offense is required to use the stop to … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Inventory, Search incident | Comments Off on OH3: Search incident under Gant isn’t automatic in a DUI arrest; more indicators required

MO: SI of bag with def was valid because, although handcuffed, he wasn’t yet in the patrol car

Search incident of a bag associated with defendant was valid here because defendant wasn’t handcuffed and inside a patrol car. Instead, he was handcuffed and outside the patrol car, and, of course, that’s a big difference. State v. Hughes, 2017 … Continue reading

Posted in Search incident | Comments Off on MO: SI of bag with def was valid because, although handcuffed, he wasn’t yet in the patrol car