Monthly Archives: February 2018

OH8: SW for “biological and/or forensic evidence” in a sex crime permitted seizure of a towel

The search warrant specifically stated that police would search for items that might have biological and/or forensic material and any other evidence tending to establish rape, but it didn’t specify a towel. The towel seized fell under the scope of … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity | Comments Off on OH8: SW for “biological and/or forensic evidence” in a sex crime permitted seizure of a towel

S.D.Ohio declines to wait for Microsoft to be decided and issues SW for gmail in another country

The government has applied for a Google search warrant stored overseas. Rather than wait for United States v. Microsoft to be decided, the court reviewed all the briefing in that case and decides that the search warrant will issue. In … Continue reading

Posted in F.R.Crim.P. 41, Reasonableness, Warrant execution | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio declines to wait for Microsoft to be decided and issues SW for gmail in another country

D.Utah: The REP is reduced on the curtilage of a duplex

Defendant was found to have abandoned property on the common area of the duplex. The privacy of the curtilage is reduced when there are others on the joint property of a duplex. United States v. Lucero, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Curtilage, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on D.Utah: The REP is reduced on the curtilage of a duplex

S.D.Ala.: Handwritten corrections on SW required a hearing as to how and why

The government contended in its brief on the motion to suppress that the search warrant was supported by controlled buys and didn’t otherwise support the CI. That requires a hearing. Corrections whiting out the address and changing it is enough … Continue reading

Posted in Standing, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on S.D.Ala.: Handwritten corrections on SW required a hearing as to how and why

CA11: District court didn’t commit plain error by imposing suspicionless supervised release condition

Defendant was convicted of wire fraud, and the district court imposed a condition of suspicionless searches for supervised releases. He complains that the court didn’t adequately explain the justification. No case says that the district court needed to, and there … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA11: District court didn’t commit plain error by imposing suspicionless supervised release condition

S.D.Ala.: That ID’ing informant “may reveal” information helpful to the defense isn’t good enough

The potential that the informant “may reveal” information helpful to the defense isn’t good enough to get the informant’s identification. United States v. Reed, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25448 (S.D. Ala. Feb. 16, 2018). The entry was based on observation … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on S.D.Ala.: That ID’ing informant “may reveal” information helpful to the defense isn’t good enough

OH5: Exigency for blood draw from accident at 1:30 am and hospitalization

Exigent circumstances existed which justified the warrantless draw of defendant’s blood. “The accident occurred at approximately 1:30 a.m. on May 8, 2016. After his initial contact with Appellant, Officer Lewis was unable to investigate further due to Appellant’s condition. Emergency … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on OH5: Exigency for blood draw from accident at 1:30 am and hospitalization

D.Kan.: After entry to arrest parole absconder, the govt could rely on protective sweep, plain view, and plain smell doctrines to expand the entry

Officers had a parole absconder warrant to retake defendant. At his motel room door, they could smell marijuana inside. After the entry, the government could rely on protective sweep, plain view, and plain smell doctrines to expand the entry. Finally, … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Plain view, feel, smell, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on D.Kan.: After entry to arrest parole absconder, the govt could rely on protective sweep, plain view, and plain smell doctrines to expand the entry

E.D.Mich.: It’s not prosecutorial misconduct to present evidence allegedly unlawfully seized to a GJ

It’s not prosecutorial misconduct to present evidence allegedly unlawfully seized to a grand jury. That was settled in Calandra in 1974. United States v. Boston, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23751 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 14, 2018). “Accordingly, the court finds that … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: It’s not prosecutorial misconduct to present evidence allegedly unlawfully seized to a GJ

techdirt: Appeals Court: Handcuffing A Compliant Ten-Year-Old Is Unreasonable But Deputy Had No Way Of Knowing That

techdirt: Appeals Court: Handcuffing A Compliant Ten-Year-Old Is Unreasonable But Deputy Had No Way Of Knowing That by Tim Cushing: Time and time again, courts remind officers of the law don’t actually have to know the law to enforce the … Continue reading

Posted in Qualified immunity, Reasonableness | Comments Off on techdirt: Appeals Court: Handcuffing A Compliant Ten-Year-Old Is Unreasonable But Deputy Had No Way Of Knowing That

S.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW judicially estopped govt to claim no standing

The affidavit for the search warrant alleged the house was defendant’s house. The government was judicially estopped from claiming otherwise in the proceeding without real evidence the affidavit was wrong. [I’ve been arguing this for years; see Treatise § 4.03.] … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Motion to suppress, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Affidavit for SW judicially estopped govt to claim no standing

Ct.Claims: Motion to dismiss denied: “plaintiffs sufficiently allege actions which are inconsistent with the exercise of police power”

Plaintiffs alleged a Fifth Amendment taking because the government took their truck to do a drug operation. The claim survives a motion to dismiss. “Because plaintiffs do not challenge the legality of the government’s action, we deny the jurisdictional challenge. … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on Ct.Claims: Motion to dismiss denied: “plaintiffs sufficiently allege actions which are inconsistent with the exercise of police power”

Just Security: Microsoft Ireland: Extraterritoriality Step Zero

Just Security: Microsoft Ireland: Extraterritoriality Step Zero by Pamela Bookman:

Posted in F.R.Crim.P. 41 | Comments Off on Just Security: Microsoft Ireland: Extraterritoriality Step Zero

VI: Govt couldn’t rely on inventory to justify search when the vehicle wasn’t impounded

Officer’s knowledge that defendant possessed a firearm was not reasonable suspicion in itself because one could possess a firearm in the VI, albeit with a license. When officers observed bullet holes in the car and defendant was nervous and evasive, … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Inventory | Comments Off on VI: Govt couldn’t rely on inventory to justify search when the vehicle wasn’t impounded

E.D.Pa.: Govt adequately showed nexus that drugs were in def’s house

The government adequately showed nexus to search defendant’s house because it showed probable cause to believe he was an active drug dealer that likely was keeping his stash at home. United States v. Rosario, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23164 (E.D. … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Govt adequately showed nexus that drugs were in def’s house

GA: Where no violation of clear statute, no Heien reasonable mistake of law defense for state

Defendant did not violate the traffic statute that the officer stopped him for. Therefore, Heien’s reasonable mistake of law and good faith doesn’t apply. Moreover, there is no good faith exception in Georgia. Harris v. State, 2018 Ga. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonableness, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on GA: Where no violation of clear statute, no Heien reasonable mistake of law defense for state

CA11: Becoming defensive about some questioning during stop didn’t rise to RS

Being in a high crime area and then becoming defensive only when the officer asked defendant where his mother lived when it came up was not reasonable suspicion. Defendant’s frisk was unreasonable on the totality. Suppressing the gun found on … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on CA11: Becoming defensive about some questioning during stop didn’t rise to RS

CA9: Federal civil suit seeking to revisit Guam Superior Court PC determination barred by abstention

A federal suit to have the Guam Superior Court revisit its probable cause determination in a criminal case is barred by Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Santos v. Superior Court of Guam, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3433 (9th Cir. Feb. 14, 2018).

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens | Comments Off on CA9: Federal civil suit seeking to revisit Guam Superior Court PC determination barred by abstention

IN: Hot pursuit into Kentucky did not violate state constitution

Defendant was more than reasonably suspected of committing a homicide in Indiana, and police got a line on him heading to Kentucky. A vehicle matching the description of his was seen on the nearest bridge to Kentucky shortly thereafter and … Continue reading

Posted in Hot pursuit, Reasonable suspicion, State constitution | Comments Off on IN: Hot pursuit into Kentucky did not violate state constitution

MA: Two detectives joining into a traffic stop didn’t make it unreasonable or extend it

The stop was for a traffic offense, and two detectives stopped to participate. Their questions about smelling marijuana didn’t unreasonably extend the stop. Commonwealth v. Buckley, 2018 Mass. LEXIS 87 (Feb. 14, 2018):

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on MA: Two detectives joining into a traffic stop didn’t make it unreasonable or extend it