Daily Archives: April 28, 2018

CA8: Parked RV was “vehicle on the premises” even though connected to water and electricity

A parked RV qualified as a “vehicle on the premises” even though it would have taken 30 minutes to make it ready to move. It had a satellite dish on the roof and it was connected to water and electricity. … Continue reading

Posted in Scope of search | Comments Off on CA8: Parked RV was “vehicle on the premises” even though connected to water and electricity

AR: State’s failure to get ruling on GFE below bars that argument on appeal; statute on BAC penalties violates Birchfield

Arkansas’s refusal to submit to a BAC test has criminal penalties, and it violates the Fourth Amendment. The trial court’s finding of voluntary consent was decided without an evidentiary hearing and is clearly erroneous. The state’s failure to get a … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Drug or alcohol testing, Good faith exception | Comments Off on AR: State’s failure to get ruling on GFE below bars that argument on appeal; statute on BAC penalties violates Birchfield

CA5: Search of wrong house by inadequate investigation means no QI

It was clearly established that search of the wrong house because of inadequate investigation violated the Fourth Amendment. Gerhart v. Barnes, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 10626 (5th Cir. Apr. 26, 2018), prior opinion Gerhart v. McLendon, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Qualified immunity, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA5: Search of wrong house by inadequate investigation means no QI

Two on protective sweep

On plain error review, the protective sweep was reasonable. The officers had information that a suggested second person could have been in the house, and he or she hadn’t been found or found not to exist. United States v. Ford, … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep | Comments Off on Two on protective sweep

E.D.Mich.: Affidavit for SW failed to show nexus, but GFE was enough to save it

“The bare assertion that defendant departed his home prior to engaging in a drug transaction does not ‘directly connect the residence with the suspected drug dealing activity.’ Id.” Peffer, 880 F.3d at 272-73 (quoting Brown, 828 F.3d at 383-84). The … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Nexus | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Affidavit for SW failed to show nexus, but GFE was enough to save it