Category Archives: Burden of proof

S.D.Ohio: This SW affidavit was adequate and different than co-def’s SW affidavit where it was suppressed

The affidavit for the search warrant as to this defendant adequately demonstrated probable cause. The fact the codefendant’s search warrant lacked probable cause isn’t binding on this search warrant. United States v. Damondo, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57204 (S.D. Ohio … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Particularity | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: This SW affidavit was adequate and different than co-def’s SW affidavit where it was suppressed

TX1: Search incident and inventory invalid for failing to signal; as to inventory, the inventorying officer is a necessary witness

A drug officer called a patrol officer to stop defendant. After he failed to promptly signal a turn, he was stopped, handcuffed, and his car was searched. “The search of Appellant’s vehicle incident to his arrest for failing to signal … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Inventory, Search incident | Comments Off on TX1: Search incident and inventory invalid for failing to signal; as to inventory, the inventorying officer is a necessary witness

NJ: Vehicle SW doesn’t sanitize the prior illegal stop or shift the burden to defense

A later issued search warrant doesn’t retroactively justify a stop the defense showed to be without a legal basis. The state carried the burden of proof throughout, and it could not shift the burden to the defense by the issuance … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on NJ: Vehicle SW doesn’t sanitize the prior illegal stop or shift the burden to defense

N.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW didn’t support def’s claim of standing

Defendant relied on the affidavit for search warrant as showing his standing, but it didn’t resolve the question, so he fails in his burden of proof and lacks standing. The government showed nexus in the 61 page affidavit for residences … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Nexus, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW didn’t support def’s claim of standing

Army: Specific issue of using computer to aid iPhone search waived by not presenting to trial court

On appeal defendant conceded the lawfulness of the seizure of his iPhone. Army investigators allegedly illegally seized a computer as well. All the trial court litigation never raised the question of the use of the computer, too, so that’s waived. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Cell phones, Consent | Comments Off on Army: Specific issue of using computer to aid iPhone search waived by not presenting to trial court

OR: Def disavowed consent issue in trial court, so he couldn’t argue it on appeal

Defendant disavowed the argument made on appeal in the trial court, and you just can’t do that. “Defendant failed to preserve his argument because he failed to provide the trial court with an objection, let alone ‘an explanation of his … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on OR: Def disavowed consent issue in trial court, so he couldn’t argue it on appeal

S.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW judicially estopped govt to claim no standing

The affidavit for the search warrant alleged the house was defendant’s house. The government was judicially estopped from claiming otherwise in the proceeding without real evidence the affidavit was wrong. [I’ve been arguing this for years; see Treatise § 4.03.] … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Motion to suppress, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW judicially estopped govt to claim no standing

NY4: Scope of search claim defaulted by not presenting it to trial court

A facial challenge to a search warrant is a question of law, and no hearing is required. On the application, probable cause was shown along with the CI’s reliability. Defendant’s claim the search exceeded the search warrant is defaulted for … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Standing | Comments Off on NY4: Scope of search claim defaulted by not presenting it to trial court

OH8: Failure to put the SW affidavit into evidence at suppression hearing waived def’s challenge

Defendant’s suppression motion made an attempt at a GPS and Franks challenge. After the hearing was over, the warrant and affidavit to procure it were not proffered for the record. This was waiver. State v. Mock, 2018-Ohio-268, 2018 Ohio App. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof | Comments Off on OH8: Failure to put the SW affidavit into evidence at suppression hearing waived def’s challenge

D.N.M.: Govt’s failure to argue validity of scope of protective sweep before USMJ waived it

The government didn’t raise validity of the scope of the full protective sweep before the USMJ and waived it after the R&R. United States v. Salazar, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10212 (D. N.M. Jan. 23, 2018). Defendant’s cell phone search … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Ineffective assistance, Protective sweep | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Govt’s failure to argue validity of scope of protective sweep before USMJ waived it

W.D.Ky.: Motion to reconsider denial of motion to suppress only raised a trial issue, not a suppression issue, so denied

Defendant’s motion to reconsider the prior denial of a motion to suppress is denied because he raises essentially only an issue for trial as to where a gun was found, not to suppress evidence. United States v. Keeling, 2018 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on W.D.Ky.: Motion to reconsider denial of motion to suppress only raised a trial issue, not a suppression issue, so denied

CA10: Scope of consent to search has to be raised in the trial court

The issue of scope of a consent search has to be presented to the trial court to be preserved. This wasn’t. United States v. Vargas, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 26869 (10th Cir. Dec. 28, 2017). There is no right to … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Scope of search | Comments Off on CA10: Scope of consent to search has to be raised in the trial court