Daily Archives: January 2, 2018

California, Florida, Illinois, and Texas versions of Search and Seizure

Want to write a version of Search and Seizure for your state? Have two years to spend on advancing your own knowledge of the subject? Lexis plans state specific versions of Search and Seizure for these states. Email the author … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

AP: “Man sits in jail when drywall powder is mistaken for cocaine” because a drug dog said it was cocaine

AP: Man sits in jail when drywall powder is mistaken for cocaine: OVIEDO, Fla. (AP) — A Florida man spent 90 days in jail after police officers who stopped him for driving without headlights said white powder found in his … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff | Comments Off

KS declines to decide whether odor of MJ on the person is PC because here there was more than just that

Defendant didn’t dim headlights and officers stopped the car suspecting inattentive driving. The smell of marijuana coming from the car was obvious. “We decline the State’s offer to embark on a new legal proposition that would allow Kansas law enforcement … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off

OH3: Narc told patrol officer def was drug suspect, and patrol officer ran DL and found it was suspended; stop valid despite pretext claim

A patrol officer was told that defendant was a drug suspect. He was told because he had stopped defendant before and was familiar with him. He ran defendant’s name through the state computer and it showed that defendant had no … Continue reading

Posted in Pretext, Probable cause | Comments Off

OH5: Working meth lab is exigency

Defendant was initially stopped with information from a CI amounting to reasonable suspicion that he was purchasing precursors and ingredients to manufacture methamphetamine. When the police got to his house, it was apparent there was a working meth lab, and … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Informant hearsay | Comments Off

MI: Electric company’s use of smart meters is not state action for 4A purposes

The electric company’s decision to install smart meters is not a Fourth Amendment issue because the company is a private actor. In re Consumers Energy Co., 2017 Mich. App. LEXIS 2161 (Oct. 10, 2017, published Dec. 28, 2017). The state … Continue reading

Posted in Private search, Surveillance technology, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off