- W.D.Ark.: Whether windshield was cracked enough to be a violation of traffic laws, it was still cracked which was enough for a stop
- OH2: On entry to arrest defendant when children were found at home, it was not unreasonable to look for others to care for them
- D.P.R.: Colombia requesting U.S. telephone number so they could wiretap it didn’t make this a joint venture
- W.D.N.Y.: The fact a SW affidavit for guns also suggests drugs doesn’t make a Franks issue; a SW can have a dual purpose but rely more heavily on one
- AL: Failure to have arrest warrant in hand under state law voids the arrest and the search incident that occurred; Heien inapplicable
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: Knock and announce
The Appeal: ‘No Knock’ Warrants Spur Wave of Civil Rights Lawsuits in Little Rock by Joshua Vaughan: “Police are accused of lying to obtain the warrants to conduct military-style raids on the homes of poor people and people of color.”
S.D.Ga.: Lack of announcement doesn’t invoke exclusionary rule; def argued he was entitled to announcement to be able to dispose of his drugs
Defendant claims his search was invalid for lack of knock-and-announce because, if they had announced, he could have destroyed the drugs and wouldn’t have been charged [apparently oblivious to the fact that’s one of the justification for dispensing with announcement]. … Continue reading
CA5: SWAT team’s firefight after failure to comply with basic no-knock requirements denies them qualified immunity
SWAT team’s violation of basic elements of no-knock of 1997’s Richards get no qualified immunity in the firefight that followed their unreasonable entry. Fact questions remain for excessive force as well. Geiger v. Sloan, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 23849 (5th … Continue reading
“[T]he officers’ alleged violation of the knock-and-announce rule had nothing to do with their seizure of the gun, drugs, and cash in Diaz-Ortiz’s hotel room pursuant to their search warrant.” Relief is barred by Hudson. United States v. Diaz-Ortiz, 2019 … Continue reading
CA8: Lack of knock-and-announce for parole search gets QI despite fact no case says it’s lawful; no “robust consensus of cases of persuasive authority”
Plaintiff absconded parolee was subjected to an unannounced entry into his hotel room about 6 am for a parole search. He was in bed with his girlfriend and a gun. The Arkansas Supreme Court held the entry violated the Fourth … Continue reading
MT: Knock-and-announce is a part of the reasonableness requirement; prior judicial authorization not required because it depends on exigency at scene
No-knock doesn’t have to be authorized by the issuing magistrate. Cause for a no-knock can be developed at the scene from the officer’s determination of exigency for justification for a no-knock. “Montana law does not also require judges to determine … Continue reading
CA9: Ptf’s affidavit there was no announcement before battering ram broke in her door makes her civil case survive summary judgment
Plaintiff showed enough of a fact question that officers never announced they were attempting to enter on a search warrant, breaking in her door, to survive their motion for summary judgment. They said, she said. Greiner v. Wall, 2019 U.S. … Continue reading
CA9: Whether state officers violated state law in the search doesn’t matter in federal court under the 4A
Defendant argues that the officers violated Washington state law in his search and seizure. That doesn’t matter in federal court. United States v. Dauenhauer, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 34797 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2018). Under Hudson, “The federal exclusionary rule, … Continue reading
MA: Justification for no-knock shown by risk of destruction of evidence because def’s apartment on 3d floor with locked outside door
A no-knock entry to prevent destruction of evidence was justified by the fact defendant’s apartment was on the third floor and police had to navigate a locked first floor door before they got to his apartment. Commonwealth v. Silva, 2018 … Continue reading
Failure to properly knock-and-announce is foreclosed as a reason for exclusion under Hudson v. Michigan. United States v. Calligan, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173193 (N.D. Ind. Oct. 9, 2018). 2255 petitioner was not prejudiced by defense counsel’s failure to challenge … Continue reading
D.S.C.: Delegating to Drug Enforcement Unit how it executes no-knocks was municipal policy, MSJ denied
The Drug Enforcement Unit’s de facto policy not to properly knock-and-announce as a municipal policy survive defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff was rendered a paraplegic during the no-knock entry. Plaintiff alleged that the DEU essentially failed to knock-and-announce at … Continue reading
First, knock and announce was complied with. The officers testified credibly they announced repeatedly as they approached. Second, even if they didn’t, exigency or futility would be an exception–futile because defendant was well aware of their presence. There was also … Continue reading