Daily Archives: April 16, 2018

Cohen pleadings online for today’s hearing in S.D.N.Y.

Two pleadings are online in Cohen v. United States, 1:18-mj-03161-KMW (S.D. N.Y.). A reply by Cohen may be filed today. Read them. The Government has the better argument. I don’t see Cohen’s argument against a “filter team” even in the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Cohen pleadings online for today’s hearing in S.D.N.Y.

OH2: Description of “things to be seized” couldn’t be more particular

The search warrant for child pornography was particular and not overbroad. No more particular description was reasonably expected. “Under the circumstances, the search warrant could not reasonably have described the items more precisely.” Defendant’s search residence was in Wisconsin, and … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Particularity | Comments Off on OH2: Description of “things to be seized” couldn’t be more particular

IN: Def’s backpack would have been searched anyway, so inevitable discovery applied

Inevitable discovery applied to the search of defendant’s backpack. He was arrested, and the search would have occurred as a result of that. The merits of defendant’s search claim is thus moot. Winborn v. State, 2018 Ind. App. LEXIS 133 … Continue reading

Posted in Forfeiture, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on IN: Def’s backpack would have been searched anyway, so inevitable discovery applied

N.D.Tex.: RS came from “extreme nervousness, conflicting stories, and the fact that he was traveling along a drug trafficking corridor”

“The government proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Trooper Styles developed reasonable suspicion of additional criminal activity during the initial stop and before Roberts consented to Trooper Styles’s request to search the Jeep. The facts of this case … Continue reading

Posted in Custody, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.Tex.: RS came from “extreme nervousness, conflicting stories, and the fact that he was traveling along a drug trafficking corridor”

D.Neb.: Unwarned questioning about control of a bedroom wasn’t custodial

UnMirandized questioning about defendant’s control of a bedroom was a close call, but not found not custodial. “This case presents a close call. On balance, the Court concludes that under Muniz and Fleck and the circumstances of this case, Sergeant … Continue reading

Posted in Custody, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Neb.: Unwarned questioning about control of a bedroom wasn’t custodial