Category Archives: Informant hearsay

MT: Entry onto def’s rural land past “Posted” and “No Trespassing” signs to issue a traffic citation was unreasonable

Entry onto defendant’s rural land past “Posted” and “No Trespassing” signs to issue a traffic citation was unreasonable. Montanans have a heightened expectation of privacy in their posted rural lands. State v. Lanchantin, 2024 MT 129 (June 18, 2024). Defendant’s … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, State constitution, Trespass | Comments Off on MT: Entry onto def’s rural land past “Posted” and “No Trespassing” signs to issue a traffic citation was unreasonable

CA2: Unlicensed and uninsured motorcycle parked on street was subject to community caretaking function when def was arrested

“Because Owens’s motorcycle was on a public street with no displayed license plate and was uninsured, the community caretaking function applied, even though it was parked at the time of his arrest.” Owens v. Fitzgerald, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12292 … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Community caretaking function, Good faith exception, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on CA2: Unlicensed and uninsured motorcycle parked on street was subject to community caretaking function when def was arrested

D.Mont.: 30-day delay in getting SW for seized storage building not unreasonable

In a kidnapping case, the 30-day delay in seeking a search warrant for defendant’s storage unit after its seizure was not unreasonable. “The Court next considers the degree to which the seizure and retention of Lepe’s storage unit and its … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on D.Mont.: 30-day delay in getting SW for seized storage building not unreasonable

W.D.Ark.: Parole search waiver moots lack of PC argument

Defendant was subject to a state warrantless parole search waiver, so the existence of probable cause to support the warrant is moot. United States v. Strickland, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73938 (W.D. Ark. Apr. 23, 2024).* “Camara argues that the … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Informant hearsay, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on W.D.Ark.: Parole search waiver moots lack of PC argument

W.D.N.C.: Smell of alcohol alone doesn’t permit search for open container

The smell of alcohol alone wasn’t justification for a search of defendant’s car for an open container. United States v. Gibson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70389 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 17, 2024). Petitioner’s claim defense counsel was ineffective for not seeking the … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.N.C.: Smell of alcohol alone doesn’t permit search for open container

W.D.Pa.: Affidavit for SW doesn’t have to say CI was reliable when the facts and circumstances alleged showed it

Defendant’s allegations of the police not saying in the warrant affidavit the CI was reliable doesn’t matter because the affidavit for warrant shows otherwise why the CI was credited. There was probable cause. To the extent this would be considered … Continue reading

Posted in Custody, Informant hearsay, Seizure | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Affidavit for SW doesn’t have to say CI was reliable when the facts and circumstances alleged showed it

D.C.Cir.: Telling def to “chill out” not a seizure

“Officer Jones never made such a show of authority; he simply told Hagan, while in uniform and in a ‘conversational tone,’ to ‘chill out.’ … Jones neither told Hagan to stop nor asked him any questions. An approach by a … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Seizure | Comments Off on D.C.Cir.: Telling def to “chill out” not a seizure

D.Minn.: Hidden compartment could be searched under automobile exception

Under the automobile exception, a search of a compartment underneath the dashboard paneling was reasonable. United States v. Payton, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57065 (D. Minn. Mar. 29, 2024).* The search issues on appeal weren’t the issues in the trial … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Scope of search, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Hidden compartment could be searched under automobile exception

E.D.N.Y.: Def gets Franks but govt also gets to show justification for protective sweep

There were mistakes in the affidavit that at least gets defendant a Franks hearing. The government, however, will get to provide more information about the justification for a protective sweep which is not confined to the four corners. United States … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Protective sweep | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Def gets Franks but govt also gets to show justification for protective sweep

D.Minn.: Regular CI had “extensive knowledge of street gangs, firearms, and narcotics distribution”; there was PC

The CI had “extensive knowledge of street gangs, firearms, and narcotics distribution,” and he’d been providing information for three months. The officers corroborated what they could. What little omissions there were in the affidavit weren’t material to the finding of … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Informant hearsay, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Regular CI had “extensive knowledge of street gangs, firearms, and narcotics distribution”; there was PC

MA: “Any persons present” clause in SW permitted search of one who left before search but hung around

“We conclude that a search warrant authorizing a search of ‘any person present’ allows a search of any person present in the property to be searched during the execution of the search warrant, including persons present during the execution but … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Scope of search | Comments Off on MA: “Any persons present” clause in SW permitted search of one who left before search but hung around

W.D.Pa.: Prisoners stated 4A claim for recording of attorney-client calls

Prison inmates stated a claim where their prison calls to their lawyers were recorded by the provider without their knowledge. “ICS’ contention that the recording here was proper because inmates have a lowered expectation of privacy is inapplicable. First, while … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Prisoners stated 4A claim for recording of attorney-client calls

CA7: CI identity irrelevant because of controlled buys

This case is about fentanyl on defendant’s person, so the identity of the CI that led police to him is irrelevant under Roviaro. Controlled buys justified his arrest. United States v. Johnson, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 4450 (7th Cir. Feb. … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Private search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: CI identity irrelevant because of controlled buys

DE: Def can’t show vindictive prosecution to get names of those who allegedly provided false information to police for SW of public records

In a case involving a public official accused of misappropriating funds, there was a search warrant for office records. She claimed she was entitled to the names of those who might have provided false information to investigators for the warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on DE: Def can’t show vindictive prosecution to get names of those who allegedly provided false information to police for SW of public records

E.D.Mich.: The SW failed particularity, but the govt proved inevitable discovery

“Defendant seeks to suppress all evidence seized from the subsequent 2018 search in this case because he argues the 2018 warrant was unconstitutionally overbroad. Although this Court concludes the 2018 search warrant violated the Fourth Amendment’s particularity requirement because it … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Inevitable discovery, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: The SW failed particularity, but the govt proved inevitable discovery

CA10: USMS Fugitive Task Force sufficiently different to not fall under Bivens

The USMS is sufficiently different from the defendants in Bivens to justify Bivens not applying where there was an alleged illegal entry of the Fugitive Task Force. Also, there are alternative administrative remedies. Logsdon v. United States Marshal Serv., 2024 … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA10: USMS Fugitive Task Force sufficiently different to not fall under Bivens

WI: Drug dog “instinct exception” not applicable here, even if it is ever adopted

The court declines to adopt, at least for now, a drug dog’s “instinct exception” for the dog entering defendant’s car. Other courts have adopted that exception, but factually it doesn’t even apply here because the court finds the dog was … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Informant hearsay, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on WI: Drug dog “instinct exception” not applicable here, even if it is ever adopted

Cal.5: Defective notice of Facebook warrant under CalECPA doesn’t require suppression

Defendant’s Facebook account was accessed by a search warrant issued under CalECPA. The notice provision was not complied with by the state, but the court declines to suppress here. The standard for suppression in CalECPA is the same as for … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Computer and cloud searches, Informant hearsay, Social media warrants, Warrant execution | Comments Off on Cal.5: Defective notice of Facebook warrant under CalECPA doesn’t require suppression

MS: No REP against CI recording you in your own house during drug deal

911 was called about a man passed out in his pickup truck in his driveway at the street.There was no reasonable expectation of privacy against letting in a wired CI under Hoffa. Douglas v. State, 2024 Miss. LEXIS 24 (Jan. … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Good faith exception, Informant hearsay, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on MS: No REP against CI recording you in your own house during drug deal

OH11: Running passenger’s ID through database didn’t violate Rodriguez

With no Ohio cases on point, looking to federal cases, the court concludes that running the passenger’s ID too was incidental to the stop and didn’t unreasonably extend it. State v. Foti, 2024-Ohio-39, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 47 (11th Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on OH11: Running passenger’s ID through database didn’t violate Rodriguez