Archives
-
Recent Posts
- W.D.Pa.: Generic motion to suppress denied
- D.N.M.: Detention hearing argument that there were “dispositive” 4A issues goes nowhere
- CA9: Inaccuracies in SW’s place to be searched didn’t misdirect officers; QI applies
- M.D.Pa.: Franks hearing denied for speculation on what video evidence might show
- AR: One can’t change 4A argument from trial court to appeal
-
ABA Journal Web 100, Best Law Blogs (2017); ABA Journal Blawg 100 (2015-16)
by John Wesley Hall
Criminal Defense Lawyer and
Search and seizure law consultant
Little Rock, Arkansas
Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book
www.johnwesleyhall.com© 2003-21,
online since Feb. 24, 2003
WebPage Visits: real non-robot hits since 2010; approx. about 30,000 posts since 2003~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fourth Amendment cases,
citations, and linksLatest Slip Opinions:
U.S. Supreme Court (Home)
Federal Appellate Courts Opinions
First Circuit
Second Circuit
Third Circuit
Fourth Circuit
Fifth Circuit
Sixth Circuit
Seventh Circuit
Eighth Circuit
Ninth Circuit
Tenth Circuit
Eleventh Circuit
D.C. Circuit
Federal Circuit
Foreign Intell.Surv.Ct.
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)
Google Scholar
Advanced Google Scholar
Google search tips
LexisWeb
LII State Appellate Courts
LexisONE free caselaw
Findlaw Free Opinions
To search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $Research Links:
Supreme Court:
SCOTUSBlog
S. Ct. Docket
Solicitor General's site
SCOTUSreport
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):
LexisWeb
Google Scholar | Google
LexisOne Legal Website Directory
Crimelynx
Lexis.com $
Lexis.com (criminal law/ 4th Amd) $
Findlaw.com
Findlaw.com (4th Amd)
Westlaw.com $
F.R.Crim.P. 41
www.fd.org
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
Privacy Foundation
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."
—Me“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
Category Archives: Neutral and detached magistrate
NY3: Issuing magistrate misstating his judicial position not reason to suppress
The issuing magistrate’s misnaming his judicial position (city judge v. acting county judge) didn’t make the search warrant void. People v. Mayhew, 2021 NY Slip Op 01807, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1924 (3d Dept. Mar. 25, 2021). A “Tag … Continue reading
CA6: Judge issuing SW isn’t barred from conducting trial
The Michigan state courts’ conclusion that the judge who issued a search warrant was not barred from hearing the trial was based on precedent, the judge didn’t remember the search warrant, and it is not an unreasonable application of existing … Continue reading
D.S.D.: Issuing magistrate shown not to be neutral and detached in issuing SW wholly lacking in PC
A tribal judge was not a neutral and detached magistrate, and the good faith exception did not apply. The application for the search warrant was technically deficient in both form (lacking a prosecutor’s signature) and substance (completely lacking probable cause), … Continue reading
CA11: Under GA law, court clerk qualified as “neutral and detached magistrate” for arrest warrants
Plaintiff “raised a section 1983 claim under the Fourth Amendment alleging that McCord did not have legal authority to issue the warrant. The district court concluded that Georgia law authorized McCord to issue warrants. Applying the Supreme Court’s two-part test … Continue reading
CA6: No 4A right to recording testimony that supplements affidavit, but there’s got to be a record
The state judge who issued the search warrant was a neutral and detached magistrate under the Fourth Amendment. Whether the magistrate had state law jurisdiction is a kind of circular argument under state law, but the Fourth Amendment only requires … Continue reading
AZ: Challenging neutral and detached magistrate requires showing “systemic or patent partiality”
“In the appeal, Macias argued against the application of the good-faith exception, claiming that the magistrate’s conduct showed he had abandoned impartiality or was unable to act in a neutral and detached manner. … However, to warrant exclusion of the … Continue reading
OH5: Trial judge signing SW wasn’t ground to recuse
The trial judge having signed a search warrant wasn’t grounds to recuse at trial. Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not raising it. The validity of the search wasn’t even an issue. State v. Ray, 2020-Ohio-1265, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 1197 … Continue reading
S.D.N.Y.: Govt satisfied § 2705(b) nondisclosure requirements; NDO didn’t violate 1A
The government showed a justifiable basis for a nondisclosure order (NDO) under 18 U.S.C. § 2705(b) of the order directed to Google for six email accounts. Assuming strict scrutiny applied, the government showed it because nondisclosure could prevent compromising an … Continue reading
CA11: Pro se litigant doesn’t sufficiently allege issuing magistrate wasn’t “neutral and detached”
Pro se prisoner’s complaint against the search warrant process in Georgia fails for a multitude of reasons and is legally frivolous. State law on search warrant does not conflict with federal law and he doesn’t sufficiently allege that the issuing … Continue reading
N.D.Fla.: Unsupported allegation state judge signing SW was “under investigation” doesn’t warrant dismissal of indictment
Defendant’s unsupported claim that the state judge who signed off on his search warrant that led to a federal indictment was under some unspecified investigation doesn’t warrant dismissal of the indictment. United States v. Hamda, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163199 … Continue reading
DC: Affidavit’s complete failure to show nexus is a lack of PC and good faith
Without something to go on, the court declines to ascribe a supposed error in an address as a mere typo. Moreover, the affidavit fails to provide any nexus to defendant and the place to be searched, and the good faith … Continue reading
D.N.D.: The fact the state judge issuing the SW represented a potential witness named in the affidavit didn’t make him not “neutral and detached”
The search warrant issuing state judge was not a neutral and detached magistrate just because he previously represented a potential witness in the case whose name was in the affidavit. There certainly was probable cause. Besides, the good faith exception … Continue reading
N.D.W.Va.: Factual mistakes in the affidavit for SW didn’t undermine the factual showing; the GFE also applies
There were factual mistakes in the affidavit for search warrant, but it doesn’t undermine the probable cause showing. In any event, the mistakes are in good faith and the good faith exception applies. United States v. Naum, 2019 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading
D.Minn.: USMJ who issues SW doesn’t have to recuse from deciding motion to suppress
The USMJ who issued the search warrant doesn’t need to recuse from deciding on a motion to suppress that warrant. “The Court also concludes that Strieff controls the analysis of Defendant’s challenge to his stop in Rock Island, Illinois. In … Continue reading
GA: Probate judge could issue SW under state law
It wasn’t a violation of state law that a probate judge signed the search warrant in this case. Joyner v. State, 2018 Ga. App. LEXIS 474 (Aug. 3, 2018). Defendant’s DNA was found on bullet casings, and that was added … Continue reading
CA9: Def shows issuing magistrate on arrest warrant wasn’t neutral and detached, but he still loses to GFE
The Ninth Circuit recognizes judicial abandonment under the neutral and detached magistrate requirement, but defendant here still loses. The officers arresting him on the warrant weren’t there when the judicial officer failed to read the papers, and they had no … Continue reading
NY3: Neutral and detached magistrate claim has to be preserved for appeal
Defendant’s claim that the issuing magistrate was not neutral and detached was not preserved for appellate review. And, in any event, it lacks merit because there was plenty of probable cause. People v. Schaefer, 2018 NY Slip Op 05235, 2018 … Continue reading
NM: State’s DNA collection act const’l under King; def has no interest in whether his DNA might end up tested against a cold case was lawfully collected
The state has an interest in collecting DNA from arrestees, and King is followed. Defendant doesn’t make any credible argument why the state constitution should be applied except that he shouldn’t have his DNA compared to that on file from … Continue reading
D.Mass.: USMJ’s spouse’s employment as a doctor at a related institution that was a victim doesn’t make her not neutral and detached when she signs SW
The USMJ here was still neutral and detached. The victim of the crime was a non-profit associated with Harvard. Her husband worked as a doctor for hospital associated with Harvard. That wasn’t a close enough relationship to require recusal. United … Continue reading