Monthly Archives: April 2018

IL: Def’s actions after stop to inquire rose to RS

Police encountered defendant and others in a car in a neighborhood where it didn’t seem to belong. The officers pulled up next to their car and talked. Based on furtive movements, the officer believed that defendant had a gun he … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on IL: Def’s actions after stop to inquire rose to RS

OH9: GPS tracking previously imposed for parole wasn’t a violation of 4A

GPS tracking as a condition of parole was based in substantial part on findings in a prior sentencing involving defendant, and that did not violate the Fourth Amendment in imposing those release conditions. That GPS information was used in this … Continue reading

Posted in GPS / Tracking Data, Probable cause | Comments Off on OH9: GPS tracking previously imposed for parole wasn’t a violation of 4A

CA11: Ten officers for a “knock and talk” violated Jardines, but it wasn’t the cause of the search of the house

Ten officers approaching defendant’s house for a “knock-and-talk” violated Jardines, but that doesn’t matter because it didn’t lead to the discovery of evidence. Defendant didn’t see them, and he opened the door in response to the knock. Then the officer … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Independent source, Knock and talk | Comments Off on CA11: Ten officers for a “knock and talk” violated Jardines, but it wasn’t the cause of the search of the house

TN: There’s normally no reason why the judge that issued the SW would be a witness at a suppression hearing on a Franks motion

The judge that issued the search warrant is not required to recuse from being the trial judge, so there was no ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to raise that issue. Moreover, the issuing judge would not be a witness … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on TN: There’s normally no reason why the judge that issued the SW would be a witness at a suppression hearing on a Franks motion

D.S.C.: Considering the totality, there was no RS for defs’ detention for a dog sniff

“After consideration of the testimony presented during multiple lengthy suppression hearings, a thorough analysis of the relevant caselaw, and a careful review of the dashcam video of the traffic stop, the court grants the motion to suppress. The court finds … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.S.C.: Considering the totality, there was no RS for defs’ detention for a dog sniff

NV: Even if PBT was a 4A violation, SW was moot because there was both PC and exigency for warrantless search

The trial court erred in suppressing the telephonic search warrant for defendant’s blood. Even if the PBT was unconstitutional, there was both probable cause and exigent circumstances without even considering it. State v. Sample, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 23, 2018 … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on NV: Even if PBT was a 4A violation, SW was moot because there was both PC and exigency for warrantless search

The Hill: Manafort challenges evidence seized by Mueller (with link to motion and warrant affidavit)

The Hill: Manafort challenges evidence seized by Mueller by Jacqueline Thomsen (link to motion, affidavit, and warrant):

Posted in Consent, Overbreadth, Overseizure | Comments Off on The Hill: Manafort challenges evidence seized by Mueller (with link to motion and warrant affidavit)

CA6: When an anticipatory SW says delivery to X, X has to receive it for search to occur

When the triggering event in an anticipatory search warrant doesn’t occur, then the search can’t occur. Here it was to a named person. Somebody else accepting it isn’t acceptable. “In this case, requiring delivery to Perkins is the only common … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipatory warrant | Comments Off on CA6: When an anticipatory SW says delivery to X, X has to receive it for search to occur

N.D.Ind.: A motion for new trial is too late to raise new grounds to suppress

Defendant litigated a motion to suppress and lost. In a motion for new trial, he raised new grounds, and this is rejected as untimely. United States v. Bishop, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57353 (N.D. Ind. Apr. 4, 2018). Defendant’s stop … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: A motion for new trial is too late to raise new grounds to suppress

N.D.Ohio: There was a fair inference business records would be at def’s house

When a white collar investigation is underway, the staleness inquiry is more flexible because records, as opposed to drugs, are regularly kept for a long time. It was reasonable here to conclude that business records would be found at defendant’s … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Staleness | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: There was a fair inference business records would be at def’s house

NJ: When driver can’t or won’t produce registration, a limited search for it is permissible

“Sufficient credible evidence supported the trial court’s determination that defendant was given an adequate opportunity to present the vehicle’s registration before the search commenced. When a driver is unwilling or unable to present proof of a vehicle’s ownership, a police … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception | Comments Off on NJ: When driver can’t or won’t produce registration, a limited search for it is permissible

N.D.Ohio: Email SW completely lacked PC, then there were false statements and material omissions, too

The motion to suppress the search warrant for defendant’s emails is granted. “Nothing in the 2013 affidavit used to obtain the search warrant approaches probable cause.” And, “Therefore, the 2013 search warrant affidavit is so lacking in indicia of probable … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Email SW completely lacked PC, then there were false statements and material omissions, too

MD: Surreptitious recording of def’s statement on cell phone violated state wiretap act

A parent’s surreptitious recording of defendant on cell phone for use to make a sex offense against him was inadmissible under the state wiretap act. Holmes v. State, 2018 Md. App. LEXIS 310 (Apr. 6, 2018).* First paragraph:

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on MD: Surreptitious recording of def’s statement on cell phone violated state wiretap act

OR: State’s inventory argument wasn’t presented during the suppression hearing, so it’s waived

The state’s inventory argument was not presented during the suppression hearing, and it can’t rely on that argument on appeal. State v. Steele, 290 Ore. App. 675, 2018 Ore. App. LEXIS 41 (Mar. 7, 2018). By letting the CI into … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Standards of review | Comments Off on OR: State’s inventory argument wasn’t presented during the suppression hearing, so it’s waived

CA8: Stop of car apparently leaving scene of crime was valid

There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop based on the fact the vehicle matched the description of one leaving the scene of a robbery by time and proximity, too. United States v. Daniel, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 8504 (8th Cir. … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA8: Stop of car apparently leaving scene of crime was valid

S.D.Ohio: This SW affidavit was adequate and different than co-def’s SW affidavit where it was suppressed

The affidavit for the search warrant as to this defendant adequately demonstrated probable cause. The fact the codefendant’s search warrant lacked probable cause isn’t binding on this search warrant. United States v. Damondo, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57204 (S.D. Ohio … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Particularity | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: This SW affidavit was adequate and different than co-def’s SW affidavit where it was suppressed

D.Minn.: Statement is suppressed, but def’s giving up passcode to cell phone is not

While defendant’s statement is suppressed, his giving up the passcode to his cell phone is not, so the search of the cell phone was by consent. United States v. Jackson, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55965 (D. Minn. Feb. 27, 2018):

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Statement is suppressed, but def’s giving up passcode to cell phone is not

MI: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in child protective proceedings

The exclusionary rule does not apply in child protective proceedings. In re Kirschner, 2018 Mich. App. LEXIS 1093 (Apr. 3, 2018):

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on MI: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in child protective proceedings

D.Neb.: Def’s Franks IAC claim fails for lack of any allegations of fact

“Lloyd makes four claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Those claims border on the ridiculous.” As to his Fourth Amendment IAC claim for not making a Franks challenge, he alleges nothing was false. United States v. Lloyd, 2018 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Neb.: Def’s Franks IAC claim fails for lack of any allegations of fact

CA6: Decedent’s putting gun to head during execution of SW at his house justified deadly force against him

Officers executing a search warrant had the target pull a gun and put it to his head, so one shot him, and he died. There was a factual dispute about whether the officers properly knocked-and-announced before entry, but that’s not … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA6: Decedent’s putting gun to head during execution of SW at his house justified deadly force against him