Daily Archives: December 13, 2018

TX: Officers jumped the gun on facts for exigency based warrantless blood draw; suppression affirmed

Defendant was in a “catastrophic car crash” and was at the hospital. Officers suspected defendant had been driving under the influence. Medical treatment and IVs were expected, and a warrantless blood draw was done. It turned out that it was … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on TX: Officers jumped the gun on facts for exigency based warrantless blood draw; suppression affirmed

DE: Whether a state tracking warrant permits tracking in NJ is avoided in favor of inevitable discovery

A tracking device was put on defendant’s Jeep by warrant, and it was tracked into New Jersey as well. The court offers that it’s a difficult question whether the vehicle could be tracked in New Jersey too, but decides the … Continue reading

Posted in Inevitable discovery, Tracking warrant | Comments Off on DE: Whether a state tracking warrant permits tracking in NJ is avoided in favor of inevitable discovery

CA9: Whether state officers violated state law in the search doesn’t matter in federal court under the 4A

Defendant argues that the officers violated Washington state law in his search and seizure. That doesn’t matter in federal court. United States v. Dauenhauer, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 34797 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2018). Under Hudson, “The federal exclusionary rule, … Continue reading

Posted in Conflict of laws, Knock and announce | Comments Off on CA9: Whether state officers violated state law in the search doesn’t matter in federal court under the 4A

CA5: Officers get QI for body cavity search with SW that turned up nothing

Plaintiff’s pat down at the jail after a valid arrest led officers to believe that he had something protruding from his anus. He denied anything was there, and he refused to consent to removing it. Officers got a search warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Body searches, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA5: Officers get QI for body cavity search with SW that turned up nothing

TN: Apparent authority to consent also determines standing

Apparent authority to consent is also standing. Lack of apparent authority to consent is no standing. State v. Madewell, 2018 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 896 (Dec. 12, 2018). The smell of marijuana was probable cause for the search of defendant’s … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority | Comments Off on TN: Apparent authority to consent also determines standing