Daily Archives: November 2, 2014

E.D.Va.: Body cam showed consent

The officers’ body cams showed that defendant consented to the entry into his hotel room. Officers were walking by the room, not even looking for defendant, and they smelled marijuana. They determined it must be coming from defendant’s room, so … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Informational privacy, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Va.: Body cam showed consent

TX8: That person signing affidavit for SW was different than one named at top didn’t matter–it’s an oath

The officer named as the affiant wasn’t the one who signed the affidavit for search warrant. That wasn’t material because was an oath by somebody. Patterson v. State, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 11996 (Tex. App.–El Paso October 31, 2014). A … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Seizure, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on TX8: That person signing affidavit for SW was different than one named at top didn’t matter–it’s an oath

Hudson v. Michigan (2006) v. Wilson v. Arkansas (1995)

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Knock and announce | Comments Off on Hudson v. Michigan (2006) v. Wilson v. Arkansas (1995)

NY Review of Books: Why Innocent People Plead Guilty

NY Review of Books: Why Innocent People Plead Guilty by Jed S. Rakoff (off topic but necessary, since venal candidates like to pick on opponents for handling any criminal case): The criminal justice system in the United States today bears … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on NY Review of Books: Why Innocent People Plead Guilty