Category Archives: Warrant requirement

TN: SW issuing magistrates have only district-wide jurisdiction and couldn’t issue SW here

By statute, magistrates issuing search warrants have only district-wide jurisdiction, and here the magistrate lacked authority to issue the search warrant at issue. The state did not show any exceptions. State v. Frazier, 2017 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 861 (Sept. … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

DE: Def doesn’t have to be named as a suspect for a SW to be valid because it’s a search for things which could be evidence

“It is Defendant’s burden to prove the warrant is unsupported by probable cause. Defendant has not met this burden. The search warrant was issued solely for the vehicle. Whether Defendant was a suspect at the time of the application for … Continue reading

Posted in Warrant execution, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

CA8: (1) In drug conspiracy case, the govt overcame staleness because of ongoing crime; (2) Issuance of SW in D.Neb. by non-cross designated USMJ in N.D.Iowa was subject to GFE

First, the search warrant in this drug conspiracy case wasn’t stale, although a long time had elasped during and between the times recorded in the affidavit of things that happened. While the evidence wasn’t strong, the deference accorded the issuing … Continue reading

Posted in F.R.Crim.P. 41, Good faith exception, Staleness, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

N.D.Ala.: Taint team not required for this document and ESI search, and that part of process vacated

The USMJ’s requirement of a taint team to review the materials seized in execution of the search warrant is unnecessary in this case and not required by the Fourth Amendment, and it is set aside. United States v. Sealed Search … Continue reading

Posted in Warrant execution, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

NH: SW jurisdictional argument has to be presented to trial court first

Defendant’s jurisdictional argument that AOL’s emails were in Virginia and not amenable to a New Hampshire search warrant wasn’t presented to the trial court, so it’s waived. State v. Bergeron, 2017 N.H. LEXIS 143 (June 30, 2017). [Note: Jurisdiction of … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

OH3: Oral testimony for SW doesn’t have to be transcribed before SW served

Oral testimony in support of issuance of a search warrant did not have to be transcribed and made part of the record before the warrant was served. State v. Wilson, 2017-Ohio-5484, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 2544 (3d Dist. June 26, … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

OR: There is no state constitutional requirement the state get a telephonic warrant to avoid exigency

The state showed adequate evidence that it would take 4-5 hours to obtain a search warrant in this case, and that was enough to show exigency here. The defense put on proof that the state could have obtained a telephonic … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

D.D.C.: Google has to produce e-mails on server in Ireland, declining to follow 2d Cir. in Microsoft II

After Second Circuit split 4-4 on whether Google could be compelled to provide e-mails stored in a server in Ireland by a warrant, a USMJ in D.C. holds that Google has to produce e-mails stored on that server. In the … Continue reading

Posted in Computer searches, E-mail, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

IN: Unchallenged SW that led to tax assessment made seizure reasonable

“In their second amended complaint, the Garwoods did assert a Fourth Amendment claim. … It is unclear what became of it, as it was still live when the State moved for summary judgment and survived that motion. In any event, … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

W.D.N.Y.: SW materials not yet releasable because investigation is ongoing; defense can get it later

The search warrant materials in this case are not released yet because the case is still pretrial and there is investigative and CI information that shouldn’t be disclosed yet. “In evaluating a common law claim of access to judicial documents, … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Warrant requirement | Comments Off