Category Archives: Standards of review

KS: Inadequate findings and conclusions must be brought to trial court’s attention before appeal

Defendant should have objected to the adequacy of findings of fact and conclusions of law on his search issue in the trial court first. “Without such an objection, this court must presume the district court found all the facts needed … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Standards of review | Comments Off on KS: Inadequate findings and conclusions must be brought to trial court’s attention before appeal

CA7: Chicago police officer who warned search target of SW properly convicted of obstruction of justice

A Chicago police officer was properly convicted of obstruction of justice when he learned from his job that drug raids and arrests were going down and he called a target he worked with to warn him. United States v. Coleman, … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA7: Chicago police officer who warned search target of SW properly convicted of obstruction of justice

S.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW of home garage also showed nexus to house in car theft operation

This investigation into a stolen car ring operated from a home garage showed nexus to the house, too. “The affidavit by Officer Chappell is clear and thorough and reflects months of information gathering. The affidavit explains the nexus between the … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Standards of review | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW of home garage also showed nexus to house in car theft operation

CA3: Municipal officers may execute federal PV warrants

Defendant was ID’d as a likely suspect in a bank robbery, and a federal probation violation warrant was issued. Municipal officers may execute federal probation violation warrants. “See, e.g., United States v. Polito, 583 F.2d 48, 51 (2d Cir. 1978); … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Probation / Parole search, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA3: Municipal officers may execute federal PV warrants

NY3: When trial court sustains search on two grounds, both have to be challenged on appeal or no error

Defendant challenged the search of his BAC which was obtained by consent and a search warrant. Challenging only the search warrant doesn’t matter because consent remains. People v. Guzy, 2018 NY Slip Op 08714, 2018 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8665 … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review | Comments Off on NY3: When trial court sustains search on two grounds, both have to be challenged on appeal or no error

IA: No conflict in motion to suppress where def counsel was law partner of issuing magistrate

Defense counsel was the law partner of the issuing magistrate. On post-conviction, defendant did not show that defense counsel was operating under a conflict of interest because defense counsel filed and vigorously litigated a motion to suppress. Kensett v. State, … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on IA: No conflict in motion to suppress where def counsel was law partner of issuing magistrate

CA6: Dist.Ct.’s findings don’t support inevitable discovery, so court applies independent source instead

The district court’s analysis doesn’t support application of the inevitable discovery exception because the court didn’t make sufficient findings on the second part of the test. Instead, the record fully supports the independent source doctrine instead. United States v. Chapman-Sexton, … Continue reading

Posted in Independent source, Inevitable discovery, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA6: Dist.Ct.’s findings don’t support inevitable discovery, so court applies independent source instead

E.D.N.C.: Trial objection was 5A and Miranda; 4A claim waived and can’t be raised post-trial

Defendant’s trial objection was based on Miranda and the Fifth Amendment. No Fourth Amendment claim was made so it is waived and post trial briefing is too late. United States v. Horton, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201898 (E.D. N.C. Nov. … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on E.D.N.C.: Trial objection was 5A and Miranda; 4A claim waived and can’t be raised post-trial

D.N.M.: Parking across def’s driveway wasn’t his seizure when he was hiding under a trailer

The officer parking across defendant’s driveway wasn’t his seizure. Defendant wasn’t seized until he came out from under a trailer. When he was seized, it was with reasonable suspicion. United States v. Shelton, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197713 (D. N.M. … Continue reading

Posted in Seizure, Standards of review | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Parking across def’s driveway wasn’t his seizure when he was hiding under a trailer

W.D.La.: Officers’ subjective belief in def’s standing at time of search isn’t material to the court’s determination on objective facts

At the time of the search, officers believed defendant had standing in the place searched, but that’s not relevant to the court’s determination. “Federal agents were aware of Defendant and believed that he lived in the residence in question. But … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Standards of review | Comments Off on W.D.La.: Officers’ subjective belief in def’s standing at time of search isn’t material to the court’s determination on objective facts

CA4: Def’s cross of officer at trial on SW affidavit “opened the door” to def’s priors

Defendant’s cross examination of the officer who authored the affidavit for the search warrant to attack his credibility by the affidavit “opened the door” to defendant’s other crimes which were admitted under 404(b) on the government’s request on redirect. United … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on CA4: Def’s cross of officer at trial on SW affidavit “opened the door” to def’s priors

CA11: Rule 60 motion on old 2255 rejected for res judicata: the SW issues were litigated in 2010

Defendant filed a FRCP 60 motion to alter the judgment in his 2255 where he’d already lost in 2010 on various issues, including a search issue. The judgment is summarily affirmed as res judicata. United States v. Dortch, 2018 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review | Comments Off on CA11: Rule 60 motion on old 2255 rejected for res judicata: the SW issues were litigated in 2010