- CA7: Entrapment defense isn’t relevant to whether controlled buy is PC; it’s a question for trial
- OH9: Inadequate findings on officer safety patdown requires remand
- Two controlled buys: one not done right, one good
- CA7: SW affidavit failed to show nexus, but it was close enough for GFE
- VA: SW tainted by unlawful entry onto the curtilage for a smell
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: Motion to suppress
Defendant’s false testimony at suppression hearing results in 2 level enhancement under the Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Jones, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 18204 (7th Cir. Sept. 20, 2017):
The FBI thought they had defendant’s wife’s consent to search his computer, but they realized she didn’t know the password, so they applied for a search warrant. Defendant waited until the start of the trial to move to suppress, and … Continue reading
NY4: Not granting a continuance of suppression hearing for unavailable witnesses was an abuse of discretion
The trial court erred in granting the motion to suppress for the nonattendance of its police witnesses after they were subpoenaed but didn’t show. The state sought an adjournment which the trial court denied. It was the first request for … Continue reading
Defendant’s motion for new trial based on possible new evidence for litigating the search and seizure claim under F.R.Crim.P. 33 is denied because it doesn’t change the outcome. United States v. Kapahu, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88922 (D. Haw. June … Continue reading
Where the motion to suppress was filed the Friday before a Monday bench trial, it was within the discretion of the district court to defer the suppression motion ruling until after all the evidence was in. United States v. Hardison, … Continue reading
PA: Deciding a motion to suppress on grounds not raised by the defense was an abuse of discretion; state didn’t get to respond
Deciding a motion to suppress on grounds not raised by the defense was an abuse of discretion because the state did not get to raise a defense to it. Commonwealth v. Banks, 2017 PA Super 182, 2017 Pa. Super. LEXIS … Continue reading
There was probable cause for the search of defendant’s cell phones in his car. He fled from an attempt to make a purchase at a store with a stolen prepaid credit card. When his car was stopped, he consented to … Continue reading
The trial court did not err in relying in part on hearsay testimony by one officer about another to find that there was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s detention. State v. Box, 2017-Ohio-1138, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 1165 (10th Dist. March … Continue reading
Defendant never filed a motion to suppress prior to trial, so the search and seizure claim is waived. Proctor v. United States, 2017 D.C. App. LEXIS 55 (March 16, 2017), amended 2017 D.C. App. LEXIS 331 (Oct. 26, 2017). The … Continue reading
Google objected to a search warrant for two email accounts, whether located in the U.S. or not. Its motion for a briefing schedule is denied. Despite case law elsewhere, the District Judge is the one to take up adversarial litigation … Continue reading
Defendant’s untimely motion to suppress is denied. United States v. Drexler, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13833 (D.Nev. Feb. 1, 2017). Defendant was arrested for bank robbery, and a search incident to arrest of his person was valid and based on … Continue reading
M.D.Pa.: Motion to suppress denied without prejudice for failure to plead any facts or law or brief the issue with cases
Motion to suppress denied without prejudice for failing to cite facts or authority or provide a cogent argument. United States v. Guerrier, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14405 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 2, 2017):