Monthly Archives: August 2018

CA4: Def who pled standing gets benefit of Byrd for standing in his rental car but loses on RS

Defendant preserved his Byrd argument that he had standing in the rental car, and he gets the benefit of it. On the merits, the officer had reasonable suspicion: Swisher Sweets cigars, sandwich bags without associated stuff, and just sprayed with … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on CA4: Def who pled standing gets benefit of Byrd for standing in his rental car but loses on RS

CA3: Expired rental agreement justified extending the stop

Defendant’s rental agreement had expired, and calling the rental company prolonged the stop. Whether the dog alerted or not wasn’t obvious on the dashcam video, but the district court found that it did, and that’s a found fact, and it’s … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA3: Expired rental agreement justified extending the stop

CA2: Def called 911 about a prowler; when police arrived he at least implicitly if not explicitly consented to police and dog entry

Defendant called 911 about a prowler possibly inside, and he consented at least implicitly if not explicitly to entry of the responding officer and his dog which then alerted to drugs. The entry was reasonable and consensual. United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Consent | Comments Off on CA2: Def called 911 about a prowler; when police arrived he at least implicitly if not explicitly consented to police and dog entry

CA11: Ptf’s claim officers falsified seizure of crack was speculative; MSJ properly granted

Plaintiff was the subject of a search for drugs, and officers at first found only marijuana. In defendant’s kitchen, in a coffee maker, officers found what they believed was a rock of crack cocaine. It was submitted to the crime … Continue reading

Posted in Police misconduct | Comments Off on CA11: Ptf’s claim officers falsified seizure of crack was speculative; MSJ properly granted

CA5: Protective sweep of bedroom def was going in was valid, but rest of house was not

Defendant did not consent to a search for his firearms. The seizure of one from his bedroom was valid because it was justified by officer safety that he was going into the bedroom to get dressed, and officers looked there … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause | Comments Off on CA5: Protective sweep of bedroom def was going in was valid, but rest of house was not

MI: Policy to photograph and fingerprint detainees violated 4A and stated claim against city

The Grand Rapids Police Department has a policy permitting officers to photograph and fingerprint people who are stopped just because they want to. The plaintiffs stated a claim for relief against the city for its policy. Johnson v. Vanderkooi, 2018 … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonableness, Seizure | Comments Off on MI: Policy to photograph and fingerprint detainees violated 4A and stated claim against city

CA6: SW’s flexibility as to when it could be executed didn’t make it an anticipatory warrant with a triggering condition

The search warrant reasonably provided flexibility as to when it would be executed, but it was not an anticipatory warrant at all. United States v. Huntley, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20956 (6th Cir. July 30, 2018):

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA6: SW’s flexibility as to when it could be executed didn’t make it an anticipatory warrant with a triggering condition

D.Kan.: Appellate counsel’s declining to appeal “including but not limited to” in the search warrant was not IAC

Appellate counsel’s declining to appeal the use of the phrase “including but not limited to” in the search warrant was not unreasonable because, as defendant admits, it does not per se lead to unreasonable searches. United States v. Ransom, 2018 … Continue reading

Posted in Independent source, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Appellate counsel’s declining to appeal “including but not limited to” in the search warrant was not IAC

D.N.M.: Def lived with his grandfather, and the “presumption of consent” in a familial relationship was apparent to officers

Defendant lived with his grandfather, and the familial relationship is different than that of a co-tenant. The evidence apparent to the officers was that the grandfather had control of the premises, and the grandson slept either in a bedroom or … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Def lived with his grandfather, and the “presumption of consent” in a familial relationship was apparent to officers

OH2: Ptf’s claims decided in criminal case were res judicata to civil case over same search

Res judicata barred plaintiff’s claims against the county for illegal search already decided against him in the criminal case. Cooper v. Montgomery County Sheriff, 2018-Ohio-2965, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 3208 (2d Dist. July 27, 2018). “Based on the totality of … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on OH2: Ptf’s claims decided in criminal case were res judicata to civil case over same search

KS: Warning officers about self-incrimination at suppression hearing deterrent enough; no exclusion

Kansas police officers can go outside their jurisdiction when requested to do so. Kansas statute implies an exclusionary remedy. Here, the officers appear to have violated the statute, but the district court warned the officers against self-incrimination at the hearing … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on KS: Warning officers about self-incrimination at suppression hearing deterrent enough; no exclusion