- SC: Exigency for CSLI was shooting victim left for dead and defendant was armed and dangerous
- CA3: Delaware “hit and hold” practice for entries not decided because of consent
- CA11: No jurisdiction to enjoin investigation after execution of SW
- The Epoch Times: Google Gave FBI Location Data for Over 5,000 Devices in Jan. 6 Probe
- S.D.Ind.: Forced Covid test didn’t violate 4A
online since Feb. 24, 2003 Approx. 350,000 visits (non-robot) since 2012 Approx. 40,000 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
"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
"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: Dog sniff
The initial dog alert here did not provide probable cause for search of defendant’s vehicle. Thus, defense counsel was ineffective for not pursuing a Fourth Amendment challenge. “In summary, based on the record before us, a motion to suppress the … Continue reading
During the traffic stop, the diversion to call for a drug dog was without reasonable suspicion and it extended the stop. State v. Still, 166 Idaho 351, 458 P.3d 220 (App. 2019), is overruled. State v. Karst, 2022 Ida. LEXIS … Continue reading
Defendant totaled his car in an accident. The black box evidence was sought by warrant, but the court holds that defendant effectively abandoned the car to the wrecking yard. Vitela v. State, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 2759 (Tex. App. – … Continue reading
“‘[A] one-frisk-only rule would create a privacy-adverse Fourth Amendment incentive’ for officers to perform ‘the most intrusive frisk possible the first time around, knowing that no more would be allowed.’” Here, there was reasonable suspicion for both frisks. United States … Continue reading
After witnessing suspicious movement, and observing white powder on the vehicle dashboard where defendant had been sitting, police had probable cause to arrest defendant on drug charges and consequently were justified in conducting a search of the defendant incident to … Continue reading
Defendant’s DNA was obtained in a 2014 case that was dismissed. The DNA from that was used to connect him to this case. The prior DNA results are not excludable just because the case went away. Hayes v. State, 2022 … Continue reading
“Defendant argues that given the evolving laws regarding marijuana (and other cannabinoid products or derivatives), dog sniffs are increasingly becoming unreliable and therefore violative of the Fourth Amendment because dog sniffs cannot discriminate between contraband and marijuana that is legally … Continue reading
Once the officer smells marijuana, it violates no law to use a drug dog first rather than just proceeding to search the car. State v. Jones, 2022-Ohio-561, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 487 (3d Dist. Feb. 18, 2022). (The less intrusive … Continue reading
N.D.Ill.: Stopping work on the traffic ticket when the drug dog arrived resulted in lengthening the detention without RS
“Officer Allen admits that he was not printing the police department’s copy of the first citation or processing the second citation during the drug sniff. Rather, he completely stopped his traffic-related mission as soon as Officer Wiebe arrived and worked … Continue reading
Defendant was stopped for a traffic offense, but the officer readily abandoned it by seeking consent and “repeatedly threatened the use of a dog sniff” if he didn’t. Commonwealth v. Conner, 2021 Ky. LEXIS 419 (Dec. 16, 2021):
The DEA had reasonable suspicion based on collective knowledge to believe a traffic offense occurred to stop defendant’s car. United States v. Camacho, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229674 (N.D.Tex. Nov. 30, 2021). Defendant challenged the search warrant for his blood … Continue reading
The trial court held defendant’s consent was involuntary. She was asked for consent and told that a drug dog was coming so she might as well give it up. The conclusion is supported by the evidence and isn’t clearly erroneous. … Continue reading
The appellate division’s affirmance of the conviction is summarily affirmed. People v. Blandford, 2021 NY Slip Op 05619, 2021 N.Y. LEXIS 2209 (Oct. 14, 2021) (dissenting opinion)*:
“The answer to this question doesn’t hinge on ‘whether the dog sniff occurs before or after the officer issues a ticket’ but whether the dog sniff ‘prolongs’ the stop. [Rodriguez] at 357. The answer today is undoubtedly no. Deputy Samuelson, … Continue reading
A drug dog’s nose through a car window before alerting is a search and a Jones trespass. De minimis, yet, but still a trespass. There was no probable cause for the automobile exception, and the state waived standing by not … Continue reading
“Here, officers deployed a drug-detection dog during a traffic stop for failing to signal continuously for at least 100 feet before turning-without articulating any independent constitutional justification. Moreover, the state has not identified any theory or pointed us to any … Continue reading
The jurisdiction of an officer to make an arrest does not make an arrest outside of the officer’s jurisdiction unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment or the state constitution. Durden v. City of Van Buren, 2021 Ark. App. 357, 2021 Ark. … Continue reading
There is a privacy interest against a drug dog being employed in a motel hallway looking for drugs in rooms under the Connecticut Constitution. The court had previously found one in apartment buildings. The citizenry wouldn’t accept free wheeling dog … Continue reading
N.D.Tex.: First dog alert was before the dog jumped in the window, so the original alert was independent of that
“Because a positive alert by a drug dog creates probable cause to search a vehicle—and this alert occurred before the dog’s nose entered Castaneda’s window—the Court finds that regardless of whether the dog’s breach of the window amounted to an … Continue reading
A drug dog’s instinctive leap through a left open car window was reasonable and didn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. State v. Ruiz, 2021 UT App 94 (Sept. 2, 2021):