- FL5: Record doesn’t show no standing in CSLI; remanded
- WaPo: The Sexts of Jeff Bezos and the Death of Privacy
- OH5: State’s claim of reasonable mistake of fact rejected: statute not ambiguous and not violated
- N.D.Ill.: Ptf adequately pled that def officers used SWs as excuse to commit theft and robberies of search targets
- D.N.M.: Pocket and backpack search and patdown of 21 students at school for stolen money was with RS so officer gets QI
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: Drug or alcohol testing
ScotusBlog: Mitchell v. Wisconsin, 18-6210 (granted Jan. 11, 2019). Issue: Whether a statute authorizing a blood draw from an unconscious motorist provides an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. Posted here: WI: Drinking and driving until unconsciousness obviates def’s … Continue reading
Drug testing of substitute teacher applicants was reasonable. School employment is different and protection of the environment of children is paramount. Friedenberg v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 35905 (11th Cir. Dec. 20, 2018):
Just because defendant was involved in a fatal accident where his passenger died, there wasn’t probable cause for a blood draw. The state did not argue exigent circumstances below or on appeal, but that would also require probable cause. People … Continue reading
TX: Officers jumped the gun on facts for exigency based warrantless blood draw; suppression affirmed
Defendant was in a “catastrophic car crash” and was at the hospital. Officers suspected defendant had been driving under the influence. Medical treatment and IVs were expected, and a warrantless blood draw was done. It turned out that it was … Continue reading
National Law Review: With Wide-Spread Legalization of Marijuana, Has A Public Employer’s Ability to Test for Marijuana Gone up In Smoke?
National Law Review: With Wide-Spread Legalization of Marijuana, Has A Public Employer’s Ability to Test for Marijuana Gone up In Smoke? by Ryan P. Heiden:
Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in a backpack he tossed from a car as he was being stopped by the police. (This conviction was February 2013; nearly six years being decided on appeal.) People v. Febo, 2018 N.Y. … Continue reading
E.D.Mich.: Govt showed basis to get SW for def’s blood to prove he wasn’t taking the oxy he was prescribed
Defendant’s oxycodone use was tipped to the police by an automated system that he was prescribed 50 oxys a day for five years [yet wasn’t dead]. “The indictment further alleges that from November 2012-November 2017, Defendant filled prescriptions on a … Continue reading
Defendant was sitting in a van when she was gotten out and then arrested. Her purse was left behind. Her purse was not subject to a search incident when she’d been handcuffed and led away. The state’s argument that inevitable … Continue reading
The state showed by a preponderance of the evidence that there were exigent circumstances for a warrantless blood draw. Natural dissipation of alcohol alone is not an exigency under McNealy. The first blood draw was potentially contaminated, so a second … Continue reading
Defendant has no right to counsel before being asked for consent to a DRE. Pirtle on advice of rights before obtaining consent from a person in custody doesn’t apply here. Dycus v. State, 2018 Ind. LEXIS 564 (Oct. 3, 2018):
Exclusion of evidence for violation of the implied consent statute is not provided for by the statute nor required by the constitution. Soza v. Marner, 2018 Ariz. App. LEXIS 157 (Oct. 2, 2018):
CA7: Officer at trial twice referring to def as “target” of search wasn’t reversible where court ordered jury to disregard
A police officer at trial twice referred to defendant as the “target of a search warrant.” The first was on direct and ordered struck and the jury directed to disregard. It happened again during cross of the same witness. Same … Continue reading