Category Archives: Standards of review

LA1: Failure to include SW materials in record requires affirmance

Failure to include all the search warrant materials in the appellate record requires affirmance of that sole issue on appeal. “Relator failed to include copies of documents that would assist with addressing his complaint including the motion to suppress, the … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Standards of review | Comments Off on LA1: Failure to include SW materials in record requires affirmance

FL1: Screen shot of of meth on a scale on driver’s cell phone permitted dog sniff during writing of traffic ticket

Defendant was stopped for a traffic offense, and he was unusually nervous. Sitting on his left leg was a cell phone with the screen on showing a picture of meth on a scale. That justified a dog sniff while a … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Standards of review | Comments Off on FL1: Screen shot of of meth on a scale on driver’s cell phone permitted dog sniff during writing of traffic ticket

D.Kan.: Pro se motion to suppress of represented def doesn’t attach affidavits, say why 4A or statute violated, or cite any law; denied for having counsel

Defendant is represented by counsel, then files a motion to suppress. “Defendant’s pro se motion reflects a misunderstanding of court proceedings. The Defendant fails to specify which search warrant he objects to, fails to provide a copy, or copies, of … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Pretext, Standards of review | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Pro se motion to suppress of represented def doesn’t attach affidavits, say why 4A or statute violated, or cite any law; denied for having counsel

CA10: De novo review overcomes a “skewed” finding of district court

Applying the Ornelas de novo review standard, the court reassesses the evidence and finds reasonable suspicion for the detention. The district court’s view of the evidence of reasonable suspicion was heavily skewed toward the government’s proof. Still, there is reasonable … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review, Waiver | Comments Off on CA10: De novo review overcomes a “skewed” finding of district court

NE: Three day old information vehicle was involved in a shooting was RS

There was reasonable suspicion for the stop of defendant’s vehicle on a three day old report of it being involved in a shooting. On appeal from a denial of a motion to suppress, the evidence from both the suppression hearing … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Staleness, Standards of review | Comments Off on NE: Three day old information vehicle was involved in a shooting was RS

CA11: Furtive gesture of hiding a cigarette pack was RS

The furtive gesture of hiding a cigarette pack during a traffic stop was reasonable suspicion (along with a few other reasons, but this is more important). United States v. Williams, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 3123 (11th Cir. Feb. 4, 2021). … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review, Waiver | Comments Off on CA11: Furtive gesture of hiding a cigarette pack was RS

S.D.Tex.: Where no GFE on first suppression inquiry, no PC here either

This was “not a real good warrant.” This court evaluates good faith first, probable cause second. [As you will see, the nature of that inquiry sets up the second answer. If the good faith exception applies, PC is close enough; … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Standards of review | Comments Off on S.D.Tex.: Where no GFE on first suppression inquiry, no PC here either

AR: Reasonableness of a probation search has to be presented to revocation court first

Defendant didn’t argue in the revocation court that the probation search was unreasonable, so it can’t be argued on appeal. Mathis v. State, 2021 Ark. App. 49, 2021 Ark. App. LEXIS 57 (Feb. 3, 2021). Defendant was on release and … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Probation / Parole search, Standards of review | Comments Off on AR: Reasonableness of a probation search has to be presented to revocation court first

OR: Outstanding warrant on passenger alone doesn’t justify frisk of driver

The fact the passenger had an outstanding warrant didn’t show reasonable suspicion for a frisk of the driver for officer safety. State v. Goguen, 308 Ore. App. 706, 2021 Ore. App. LEXIS 75 (Jan. 27, 2021).* “We agree with the … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on OR: Outstanding warrant on passenger alone doesn’t justify frisk of driver

CA6: Search issue not decided because it’s harmless in light of other proof

While the suppression motion as to admissibility of seized cash probably should have been granted, it was harmless error in light of the proof of possession of heroin. United States v. Morton, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 2404 (6th Cir. Jan. … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review | Comments Off on CA6: Search issue not decided because it’s harmless in light of other proof

CA1: Defense must argue cost v. benefits of exclusionary rule or issue is likely waived

When invoking the exclusionary rule, the defendant necessarily has to show that the deterrence value of exclusion outweighs the costs of exclusion. United States v. Cruz-Ramos, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 2284 (1st Cir. Jan. 27, 2021), n. 9:

Posted in Burden of pleading, Good faith exception, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA1: Defense must argue cost v. benefits of exclusionary rule or issue is likely waived

IA: De novo review (apparently) means looking at the dashcam video

De novo review (apparently) means looking at the dashcam video: “Upon our review of the video, we find, as did the district court, Hales’s vehicle was ‘drifting left and traveling over the dividing line of the lanes’ at 12:30 in … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Standards of review | Comments Off on IA: De novo review (apparently) means looking at the dashcam video

OH5: If suppression court goes off on an unaddressed issue, the parties get to respond

If the trial court in a suppression hearing goes off in another direction not raised by the parties, the parties get to respond. Here, the state was on notice. State v. Arthur, 2021-Ohio-104, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 100 (5th Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on OH5: If suppression court goes off on an unaddressed issue, the parties get to respond

CA4: Ptf’s claim the statute he was arrested under was unconstitutional is barred by DeFillippo

Plaintiff’s claim that his arrest and search was invalid because the statute under which he was stopped and arrested was unconstitutional is barred by Michigan v. DeFillippo. Quigley v. City of Huntington, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 760 (4th Cir. Jan. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Issue preclusion, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA4: Ptf’s claim the statute he was arrested under was unconstitutional is barred by DeFillippo

GA: When there is PC for an arrest, the validity of an arrest warrant is moot

There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest, so the validity of the arrest warrant doesn’t matter. Harper v. State, 2021 Ga. LEXIS 2 (Jan. 11, 2021). Defendant’s claim of lack of probable cause is really just an effort to construe … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Standards of review | Comments Off on GA: When there is PC for an arrest, the validity of an arrest warrant is moot

CA5: Standard of review: GFE first, basis for finding PC second

“This court engages in a two-step inquiry when reviewing a district court’s denial of a defendant’s motion to suppress which challenges the sufficiency of a warrant. … First, this court determines whether the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule announced … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA5: Standard of review: GFE first, basis for finding PC second