- CA3: Violation of Vienna Convention on arrest doesn’t lead to dismissal
- CA9: On remand for a hearing on inevitable discovery, the district court found it applied three ways
- The Hill: Special master in Cohen case rejects more than a third of legal team’s privileged items
- Recode: Your phone is not secretly spying on your conversations. It doesn’t need to.
- MS: No REP in calls from police station
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: Apparent authority
E.D.Va.: Manafort storage building search sustained: Employee with free access had apparent authority to consent to entry
The FBI reasonably relied on a person with apparent authority to consent to an entry into a storage locker to look around. The consenter had free access to the storage room as an employee, and the employer-employee relationship can permit … Continue reading →
TPM: Manafort Loses Fight Over Storage Unit Search In Virginia Case by Tierney Sneed (opinion in story):
CA11: Def was outside while consent sought from cotenant inside; consent valid and Randolph doesn’t help him
The consent of a cotenant was voluntary and valid, and she clearly had apparent authority to do so. Defendant was nearby and outside, but the police made no effort to ask him for consent nor to segregate him to prevent … Continue reading →
M.D.Pa.: Three robberies was a pattern sufficient to allow a broader search period and thus overcame this staleness challenge
Three armed robberies showed a pattern of activity that allowed a broader period in the application for the warrant, and thus overcame a staleness challenge. The affidavits for search warrant provided a substantial basis for finding probable cause, especially considering … Continue reading →
D.D.C.: Manafort DC search valid: The person on the lease of a storage unit and with the keys had [apparent] authority to consent
The search of Paul Manafort’s storage unit was with the consent of the person on the lease and did not violate the Fourth Amendment. It was reasonable for the FBI to believe that the person with the keys had the … Continue reading →
D.N.M.: Protective sweep valid to look for other pressure cooker bombs; parent has presumptive apparent authority to consent to search of adult child’s room
Defendant was suspected of making a pressure cooker bomb, which was found. (1) A protective sweep was proper to determine whether there were others in the house. (2) The house was owned by defendant’s father, and defendant merely lived there. … Continue reading →
“The seizure of a patient’s blood sample pursuant to a search warrant addressed to a hospital does not violate the statutory physician-patient privilege because a blood sample collected by the hospital as part of medical treatment does not constitute ‘information’ … Continue reading →
The fact the City of Schenectady’s rental building inspection code says that the inspectors may get a warrant instead of shall doesn’t state a Fourth Amendment violation. There’s no evidence that the city has applied it unconstitutionally yet. Hafez v. … Continue reading →
N.D.Ga.: Facebook SW was valid when issued, but later case law said it would have been overbroad; valid by GFE
The Facebook warrant here was overbroad, but it was consistent with case law at the time. Later case law said that it would have been overbroad. Nevertheless, reliance on case law at the time the search warrant was issued is … Continue reading →
“Valenzuela had actual authority to consent to the search, or at the very least, the officer had a reasonable belief she had common authority over the residence. E.g., United States v. Matlock, …; see also Illinois v. Rodriguez, …. Valenzuela … Continue reading →
“The mere filing of a motion [to suppress] is not proof that a search occurred.” Defendant first failed to prove that he was the subject of the search. Second, even if it was assumed, the hospital took the blood draw … Continue reading →
CA6: “Pill mill” employee was a snitch who let in undercover DEA agent as a patient; this was consent to enter and assumption of risk
The defendant was suspected of running a “pill mill.” A nurse practitioner worked for the clinic and was feeding information to the DEA as well as engaging in illegal acts, too. The DEA got the nurse to let an undercover … Continue reading →