Daily Archives: May 18, 2019

E.D.Wis.: Stationary video surveillance of a common area not subject to Carpenter

Stationary video surveillance outside an apartment building of common areas is not at all analogous to Carpenter. “The defendant urges the court to compare his facts to those in Whitaker. Dkt. No. 223 at 9. The defendant argues that a … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Stationary video surveillance of a common area not subject to Carpenter

NY2: Judge issuing SW had discretion to recuse from suppression hearing

The judge issuing the Facebook warrant in this case was within her discretion in recusing from determining the merits. Besides, there was probable cause, and the search warrant was particular. People v. Grose, 2019 NY Slip Op 03808, 2019 N.Y. … Continue reading

Posted in Standing, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on NY2: Judge issuing SW had discretion to recuse from suppression hearing

CA5: Hearsay to get a SW isn’t necessarily admissible at trial

Just because hearsay can be used to get a search warrant, that doesn’t make that same hearsay admissible at trial without violating the Confrontation Clause. United States v. Jones, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 14550 (5th Cir. May 16, 2019). “Here, … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay | Comments Off on CA5: Hearsay to get a SW isn’t necessarily admissible at trial

SC: Three psuedo buys in one day was RS, and the smell of ammonia at his house justified a protective sweep

Defendant’s three purchases of pseudoephedrine in one day was reasonable suspicion that he had a meth lab to support a protective sweep because, when the dwelling door was opened, the smell of ammonia was overwhelming. State v. Kotowski, 2019 S.C. … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on SC: Three psuedo buys in one day was RS, and the smell of ammonia at his house justified a protective sweep

D.N.M.: Inventory was unjustified

It was apparent the officer wanted to search defendant’s car, so he devised a way to seize it, but it was without justification. Thus, the inventory was unreasonable. United States v. James, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82527 (D. N.M. May … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Inventory was unjustified

E.D.N.Y.: Search of car’s fuse box reasonable in an inventory

The search of a car’s fuse box was reasonable under the inventory search exception. The body cameras were on when the inventory started and then were turned off. The court declines to find that this showed bad faith because everything … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Search of car’s fuse box reasonable in an inventory

Biometric Update: Opinions roll in on whether to ban, regulate, or hardly regulate biometric facial recognition

Biometric Update: Opinions roll in on whether to ban, regulate, or hardly regulate biometric facial recognition by Chris Burt:

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on Biometric Update: Opinions roll in on whether to ban, regulate, or hardly regulate biometric facial recognition

E.D.Wis.: In camera submissions to rebut Franks claim should have had a hearing

An in camera submission of materials to rebut defendant’s Franks claim required a hearing. Defendant was entitled to see it and then respond. United States v. Lewis, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81937 (E.D. Wis. May 15, 2019). Which begs the … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: In camera submissions to rebut Franks claim should have had a hearing