Category Archives: Pole cameras

CA6: CSLI by court order was valid; lengthy pole camera observation of publicly seen areas reasonable

Lengthy CSLI was obtained by a cell site simulator but with a court order. Pleading the pen register statute is no help to the defense because there is no exclusionary remedy. Pre-Jones GPS tracking was valid under Davis. Finally, lengthy … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Pole cameras | Comments Off on CA6: CSLI by court order was valid; lengthy pole camera observation of publicly seen areas reasonable

N.D.Ind.: RS came from GPS, pole camera surveillance, CI’s observations, police surveillance

“The Court concludes that the task force’s investigation of Cupp led to reasonable articulable suspicion that he was dealing drugs from his residence and had also been stealing lawnmowers, ATV’s, and motorcycles. The informant’s observations, police surveillance, video of his … Continue reading

Posted in GPS / Tracking Data, Pole cameras | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: RS came from GPS, pole camera surveillance, CI’s observations, police surveillance

EFF Urges Sixth Circuit to Revisit Case Finding No Warrant Needed for Ten Weeks of Covert 24/7 Video Surveillance

EFF Urges Sixth Circuit to Revisit Case Finding No Warrant Needed for Ten Weeks of Covert 24/7 Video Surveillance by Jennifer Lynch: EFF joined NYU Law School’s Brennan Center for Justice, ACLU, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the Libertarian … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras | Comments Off on EFF Urges Sixth Circuit to Revisit Case Finding No Warrant Needed for Ten Weeks of Covert 24/7 Video Surveillance

CA6: Ten weeks of pole camera surveillance on rural property no Fourth Amendment violation

The Sixth Circuit distinguishes Anderson-Bagshaw and holds ten weeks of pole camera surveillance on rural property violated no reasonable expectation of privacy. “Rocky Houston appeals his conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on CA6: Ten weeks of pole camera surveillance on rural property no Fourth Amendment violation

E.D.Mich.: IAC claim over search denied for lack of factual proffer

2255 petitioner’s IAC claim denied for generality and no factual basis: “Here, the petitioner has failed to develop any factual basis or legal argument on the performance element, beyond the naked assertion that his attorneys did not advance any arguments … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Pole cameras | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: IAC claim over search denied for lack of factual proffer

OH4: Defendant didn’t have standing to challenge pole camera surveillance of friend’s house

Defense counsel was not ineffective for not raising a technical challenge that, at the time, was meritless but the law later changed. The exclusionary rule wouldn’t apply. He also lacked standing to challenge pole camera surveillance of somebody else’s house. … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on OH4: Defendant didn’t have standing to challenge pole camera surveillance of friend’s house

W.D.Pa.: Long term pole camera surveillance of front of house valid

Suppression of long term pole camera surveillance of defendant’s front door almost summarily denied. United States v. Gilliam, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118511 (W.D.Pa. September 4, 2015):

Posted in Pole cameras | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Long term pole camera surveillance of front of house valid

D.Mass. somewhat reluctantly concludes, after surveying many cases, that long term pole camera surveillance of defendant’s front door is constitutionally proper

D.Mass. somewhat reluctantly concludes, after surveying many cases, that long term pole camera surveillance of defendant’s front door is constitutionally proper. That surveillance led to a GPS warrant on a car. United States v. Garcia-Gonzalez, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116312 … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras | Comments Off on D.Mass. somewhat reluctantly concludes, after surveying many cases, that long term pole camera surveillance of defendant’s front door is constitutionally proper