Daily Archives: April 9, 2014

CA11: Warrantless recording and monitoring of private attorney-client conversations in a police station interview room clearly violated 4A

Warrantless recording and monitoring of private attorney-client conversations in a police station interview room violated clearly established Fourth Amendment law, so no qualified immunity. [Talk about “clearly established law” …] Gennusa v. Canova, 748 F.3d 1103 (11th Cir. 2014):

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on CA11: Warrantless recording and monitoring of private attorney-client conversations in a police station interview room clearly violated 4A

New Law Review Article: Goldilocks and the Fourth Amendment: Why the Supreme Court of North Carolina Missed an Opportunity to Get Officer Mistakes of Law “Just Right” in State v. Heien

John B. Lyman, Goldilocks and the Fourth Amendment: Why the Supreme Court of North Carolina Missed an Opportunity to Get Officer Mistakes of Law “Just Right” in State v. Heien, 92 N.C. L. Rev. 1012 (2014). [Note also that Heien … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

TN: Consent to a search blood is different than consent to a medical procedure

Consent to a search blood is different than consent to a medical procedure. Consent to one is not consent to the other. State v. Evans, 2014 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 318 (April 4, 2014):

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

CA9: Search incident of bag in airport arrest was valid

The search of defendant’s bag at Sea-Tac airport was valid as a search incident. A warrant was obtained to search his computer. United States v. McGrue, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 6374 (9th Cir. April 7, 2014).* The detailed information from … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Cato: The Fourth Amendment: Cars, Phones, and Keys?

Cato: The Fourth Amendment: Cars, Phones, and Keys? by Jim Harper:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Oregonian: Mohamed Mohamud deserves new trial due to ‘unconstitutional’ surveillance, lawyers argue

The Oregonian: Mohamed Mohamud deserves new trial due to ‘unconstitutional’ surveillance, lawyers argue by Helen Jung:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

WaPo: Volojh: Another denied application from Judge Facciola in the e-mail warrant case

WaPo: Volojh: Another denied application from Judge Facciola in the e-mail warrant case by Orin Kerr:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment