- S.D.Ind.: CSLI search two years before Carpenter was valid under GFE
- S.D.Tex.: Warrantless search of cell phone six years after border crossing violated 4A
- PA: Trial court’s deciding to suppress based on an argument not made by def was error
- CA9: Nominal damages for 20 min detention supported by evidence
- N.D.Ga.: Govt bore burden of proof on inevitable discovery and failed; weak hearsay not credited
online since Feb. 24, 2003
WebPage Visits: real non-robot hits since 2010; approx. 25k 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
2017 ABA Journal Web 100
Category Archives: Dog sniff
Defendant’s three sentence motion to suppress said it would follow up with authority. The motion and hearing without that authority narrowed the scope of the claim and abandoned the justification for the stop and any state constitutional claim. What developed … Continue reading
The New American: Do Tech-sniffing K9s Violate the Fourth Amendment? by Joe Wolverton, II: For several years, police and the FBI have been secretly training dogs to sniff out thumb drives, SD cards, and other small electronic devices. These special … Continue reading
Defendants’ failure to stop at stop signs was justification for the stop. A backup officer with a drug dog did a dog sniff around the car while the basic stuff of the traffic stop was being done. This did not … Continue reading
W.D.Ky.: Drug dog sticking his nose into defendant’s car was instinctual and wasn’t caused by the police
A drug dog sticking his nose into defendant’s car was instinctual and wasn’t caused by the police, following United States v. Sharp, 689 F.3d 616 (6th Cir. 2012). United States v. Miles, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66899 (W.D. Ky. Apr. … Continue reading
Defendant’s home was subjected to a dog sniff a year before Jardines. Relying on that, the trial court suppressed. Because enough Texas cases held similar searches were valid prior to Jardines, the court concludes that the exclusionary rule would not … Continue reading
KY: Deploying drug dog at the beginning of the stop without reasonable suspicion unreasonably prolonged the stop in violation of Rodriguez
Defendant was stopped for not using a turn signal. Deploying the drug dog at the beginning of the stop without reasonable suspicion unreasonably prolonged the stop in violation of Rodriguez. Commonwealth v. Smith, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 128 (Mar. 26, 2018):
CA8: No standing to challenge a DEA administrative subpoena just used to identify his storage unit for a dog sniff
Defendant had no standing to complain that a DEA administrative subpoena was used to identify the storage unit that was his so the DEA could use a drug dog on his storage unit. Defendant’s plain error argument that a tracking … Continue reading
The police received informant hearsay, and sought to corroborate it, and a trash pull did it. State v. Rieves, 2018-Ohio-955, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 1021 (8th Dist. Mar. 15, 2018). The town’s housing inspection scheme is reasonable under the Fourth … Continue reading
NE: Because of direct evidence def was involved in crime, computer search history was harmless error, if error at all
Defendant challenged the search for lack of probable cause of the search history of his computer that produced evidence he searched for violent pornographic videos that matched how the victim was killed. There was direct evidence he was involved in … Continue reading
N.D.Iowa: On totality, dog alert was reliable; not much difference between an “alert” and an “indication”
On the totality of the evidence, recognizing that dog sniffs can be unreliable (see quote), the court finds this one reliable. Also, there isn’t much difference here between a dog “alert” and an “indication.” United States v. Herbst, 2017 U.S. … Continue reading
There is no constitutional difference between a drug dog’s “alert” and “indication.” The dog’s actions and what it means to the handler are just a factor in probable cause to search. United States v. Herbst, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6516 … Continue reading
The totality of circumstances that the government presents fails to show reasonable suspicion. Defendant was subjected to a dog sniff by the stopping officer without it, and the motion to suppress is granted because it prolonged the stop. United States … Continue reading