Daily Archives: October 23, 2017

Law.com: The Old Particularity in New Digital Raids

Law.com: The Old Particularity in New Digital Raids by Peter A. Crusco In his Cyber Crime column, Peter A. Crusco addresses the particularity requirement as it relates to digital evidence seized by search warrant, reviews some of the recent cases, … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Computer searches, Particularity | Comments Off

Forbes: Is Warrantless Access To Cell Site Info A Fourth Amendment Violation? A Primer On Carpenter v. US

Forbes: Is Warrantless Access To Cell Site Info A Fourth Amendment Violation? A Primer On Carpenter v. US by John Villasenor

Posted in Cell site location information | Comments Off

E.D.Mich.: Def driving back to his house after a drug sale establishes nexus to the house

Driving back to one’s house after a drug sale establishes nexus to the house. United States v. Rich, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173634 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 20, 2017). Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress defendant’s stop which … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus | Comments Off

FL5: Driver can be ordered out of car for dog sniff

Defendant’s car was going to be subjected to a dog sniff, and the handler wanted him out. The first officer directed defendant out of the car, which is reasonable in any traffic stop. At that point, a gun could be … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff | Comments Off

S.D.W.Va.: Govt established RS to detain def’s express mail package

The officers here had reasonable suspicion to detain defendant’s express mail parcel. United States v. Zirkle, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173863 (S.D. W.Va. Oct. 20, 2017):

Posted in Mail and packages | Comments Off

D.Haw.: 20 day delay in getting SW for backpack was unreasonable

The seizure of defendant’s backpack for 20 days without seeking a search warrant was unreasonable. It infringed on defendant’s possessory interest, even though he did not seek return of the backpack. United States v. Uu, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170636 … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off

VT: Where no testimony supports the trial court’s finding of fact, the finding is clearly erroneous

“One of the findings could be based only on testimony from the officer: ‘Although [defendant's girlfriend] had not expressly stated that [the officer] could come into the house, he interpreted her action as inviting him in.’ There is no testimony … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off

MS: SW request was for blood alcohol but SW said drugs too; warrant not unreasonable or overbroad

The showing of probable cause for defendant’s blood testing specified alcohol, but the warrant actually said alcohol or drugs could be tested for. This was not unreasonable considering defendant’s driving which was a part of the probable cause. Roberts v. … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off