Daily Archives: March 6, 2017

E.D.Cal.: 26 U.S.C. § 7609 and the Code of Professional Conduct for CPAs creates no REP; Couch remains good law

“[D]efendant Galloway moves to suppress from admission into evidence the tax records received from CPA Livsey by IRS agents, arguing that 26 U.S.C. § 7609 and the Code of Professional Conduct for CPA’s conferred upon him a reasonable expectation of … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off

W.D.Mo.: Dispute over inventory didn’t need to be resolved because automobile exception applied in any event

Defendant was stopped for no front license plate, and that led to a finding that his DL was revoked and the vehicle unlicensed. During his arrest, it was determined that there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest. The officer … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception | Comments Off

E.D.N.C.: Officers first said they were from Publishers’ Clearinghouse, then said “open the door or we are going to knock it down.” Consent after that was valid

Officers first knocked at door saying they were with Publishers’ Clearinghouse, but defendant didn’t come to door. Then they said in Spanish “open the door or we are going to knock it down.” It was on body camera. On the … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Stop and frisk | Comments Off

D.Nev.: To have standing in a package, one must be addressee or sender

In this conspiracy case involving mailed packages, none of the defendants were shown as the sender or addressee of this package. The defendant pursuing the motion didn’t even directly possess the package: He drove a woman to the post office … Continue reading

Posted in Mail and packages, Standing | Comments Off

ME: Def’s mere acquiescence to his blood draw was not consent

Defendant’s mere acquiescence in his blood draw was not consent, and the trial court’s suppression order is affirmed. Implied consent no longer exists by statute, and the state had to prove consent. The trial court held that it did not, … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off

CA5: Interstate bus passenger had no standing against a dog sniff of the luggage compartment

An interstate bus passenger had no standing against a dog sniff of the luggage compartment of the bus. United States v. Rodriguez-Lara, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3774 (5th Cir. March 2, 2017):

Posted in Dog sniff, Standing | Comments Off

D.N.J.: “including but not limited to” in SW was not overbroad; it had to be read in context

A search warrant with a particularity clause of “including but not limited to” was not overbroad and had to be read in context of the preceding language. United States v. Schaffer, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26257 (D.N.J. Feb. 24, 2017).* … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Independent source, Particularity | Comments Off