Category Archives: Standards of review

S.D.Ohio: Collective knowledge applies to traffic stops

The collective knowledge doctrine applies to traffic stops. United States v. Murray, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111040 (S.D. Ohio June 24, 2020). “Applying this [deferential] standard of review to the warrant application, the Court has reviewed the application and finds … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Probable cause, Standards of review | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Collective knowledge applies to traffic stops

E.D.Ky.: Objection to USMJ’s findings must specifically challenge 4A rationale

“Defendant’s objections do not address the Magistrate’s analysis or conclusions regarding Grounds 11 and 15. Instead, Defendant vaguely asserts that his counsel should have challenged the ‘validity of [the] evidence[.]’ (DE 406 at 7.) Defendant provides no basis to challenge … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: Objection to USMJ’s findings must specifically challenge 4A rationale

S.D.Ga.: Govt’s GFE exception argument waived by not being presented to USMJ

The officer here departed from the investigation of the traffic offense without reasonable suspicion, and the stop became unreasonable. The government’s argument that Rodriguez hadn’t been decided at the time this happened wasn’t presented to the magistrate, so it’s waived. … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Standards of review, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.Ga.: Govt’s GFE exception argument waived by not being presented to USMJ

TN: Without findings of fact, the appellate court can review the dashcam video and draw its own conclusions

The trial court didn’t make findings of fact, so the appellate court can review the dashcam video and draw its own conclusions. “The trial court reviewed the testimony of the only witness and made an implicit finding that his testimony … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Standards of review | Comments Off on TN: Without findings of fact, the appellate court can review the dashcam video and draw its own conclusions

FL1: Possession of a concealed weapon in Florida isn’t inherently criminal, so no RS

Possession of a concealed weapon in Florida isn’t inherently criminal, and the officer lacked reasonable suspicion for a patdown and removing the gun from defendant’s waistband. Kilburn v. State, 2020 Fla. App. LEXIS 7525 (Fla. 1st DCA May 29, 2020) … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on FL1: Possession of a concealed weapon in Florida isn’t inherently criminal, so no RS

TN: With no findings of fact, court can look at dashcam video and draw own conclusion suppression was appropriate

The trial court didn’t make findings of fact, so the appellate court can review the dashcam video and draw its own conclusions. “The trial court reviewed the testimony of the only witness and made an implicit finding that his testimony … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority, Standards of review | Comments Off on TN: With no findings of fact, court can look at dashcam video and draw own conclusion suppression was appropriate

OH5: Trial court’s finding of officer’s credibility where dashcam didn’t help was binding on appeal

The dashcam video was inconclusive on whether defendant stopped, but the trial court credited the officer, and that’s binding on the court of appeals. State v. Blasingame, 2020-Ohio-3087, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 2029 (5th Dist. May 21, 2020).* Two dashcam … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Qualified immunity, Standards of review | Comments Off on OH5: Trial court’s finding of officer’s credibility where dashcam didn’t help was binding on appeal

CA6: Lack of PC for SW doesn’t deprive court of jurisdiction over criminal case

In seeking a successor habeas petition, inter alia: (1) all the alleged ineffective assistance claims were known at the time of the original petition; (2) “Joy’s claim that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over his prosecution because the search-warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA6: Lack of PC for SW doesn’t deprive court of jurisdiction over criminal case

LA1: Claim probation violation warrant lacked justification that led to search incident has to be argued on appeal

Defendant claimed his probation violation arrest warrant was defective and then argued the search incident to his arrest was thus invalid. On appeal, he doesn’t argue the validity of the arrest warrant, so the argument is waived. State v. Anglin, … Continue reading

Posted in Search incident, Standards of review, Warrant execution | Comments Off on LA1: Claim probation violation warrant lacked justification that led to search incident has to be argued on appeal

FL5: Trial court’s order suppressing warrantless black box search affirmed for lack of a record

The trial court granted a motion to suppress the search of defendant’s car’s black box (“event data recorder”). The state on appeal seeks to depart from State v. Worsham, 227 So. 3d 602, 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), that there … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Standards of review, Surveillance technology | Comments Off on FL5: Trial court’s order suppressing warrantless black box search affirmed for lack of a record

D.N.M.: Violated no REP to open driver door to read VIN where dashboard number obscured

It was reasonable to open a car door to read the VIN on the doorjamb under New York v. Class because the officer couldn’t see the one on the dashboard because of the glare of the sun. Otherwise, there was … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Nexus, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standards of review | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Violated no REP to open driver door to read VIN where dashboard number obscured

OH9: Possession of <100g MJ is a nonarrestable offense, so a search incident was unreasonable

Possession of <100g marijuana is a nonarrestable offense, so a search incident was unreasonable. State v. R.L., 2020-Ohio-2811, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 1774 (9th Dist. May 6, 2020). Without a motion to suppress, there’s no vehicle for development of a … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Search incident, Standards of review | Comments Off on OH9: Possession of <100g MJ is a nonarrestable offense, so a search incident was unreasonable

TX2: SW for seizure of blood includes the ability to analyze it

It is well settled in Texas that a search warrant for blood in a DUI case includes the ability to analyze it. Jacobson v. State, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 3447 (Tex. App. – Ft. Worth Apr. 23, 2020). Defendant’s CSLI … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Scope of search, Standards of review | Comments Off on TX2: SW for seizure of blood includes the ability to analyze it

CA7: When PC for a SW is the issue, the affidavit is the sole thing to be reviewed on appeal, not the govt’s summary for district court

The government provided the district court a three page summary of the 17 page affidavit for search warrant. Defendant argues that the summary was more inculpatory than the affidavit itself. This is beyond the standard of review because it’s the … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA7: When PC for a SW is the issue, the affidavit is the sole thing to be reviewed on appeal, not the govt’s summary for district court

CA6: While federal law requires RS for a supervised release search, it wasn’t error for district court here to permit suspicionless searches

District court did not plainly err in imposing a suspicionless search condition separate from federal law that normally requires reasonable suspicion. United States v. Sulik, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 10450 (6th Cir. Mar. 31, 2020). “Nothing in the record suggests … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Probation / Parole search, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA6: While federal law requires RS for a supervised release search, it wasn’t error for district court here to permit suspicionless searches

E.D.Ky.: Failure to present issue before USMJ waives it

Defendant’s new issue of lack of consent wasn’t presented before the USMJ, so it can’t be raised in the objections. United States v. Allen, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57604 (E.D. Ky. Apr. 2, 2020). “Hunt has not shown that Glenn … Continue reading

Posted in Qualified immunity, Standards of review | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: Failure to present issue before USMJ waives it