Daily Archives: September 18, 2019

SD: Def’s search issue on appeal wasn’t presented to the trial court, so it’s waived

Defendant’s claim that evidence discovering during a traffic stop had to be suppressed because the duration of the stop was unlawful was waived because he failed to advance that argument before the trial court. State v. Willingham, 2019 SD 55, … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Search incident | Comments Off on SD: Def’s search issue on appeal wasn’t presented to the trial court, so it’s waived

NE: Scrivener’s error in describing cell phone in SW could be cured by reference to affidavit

There was a scrivener’s error in describing the cell phone subject to the search warrant, and it could be corrected by looking to the affidavit. State v. Stelly, 304 Neb. 33 (Sept. 13, 2019). Defendant has no claim that the … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Particularity, Warrant execution | Comments Off on NE: Scrivener’s error in describing cell phone in SW could be cured by reference to affidavit

NYT: Opinion: Privacy Is Not Your Responsibility

NYT: Opinion: Privacy Is Not Your Responsibility by Charlie Warzel (“The idea that you have control is an insidious illusion.”)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on NYT: Opinion: Privacy Is Not Your Responsibility

OH2: Looking through a parked car’s windows with a flashlight is not a “search”

Officers looked through defendant’s vehicle windows when it was parked with a flashlight during a nighttime stop, and that wasn’t an unreasonable search. In the vehicle was meth in plain view. State v. Brown, 2019-Ohio-3684, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3766 … Continue reading

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Search | Comments Off on OH2: Looking through a parked car’s windows with a flashlight is not a “search”

CA2: Initially stopping for a police signal, arguing with officers, and then fleeing in a high speed chase wasn’t a “seizure” until he was arrested after the chase

Defendant wasn’t seized when he stopped as a result of a police signal, became argumentative, and fled the scene without submitting to authority. After that, he was seized after a high speed chase that gave the officers probable cause for … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on CA2: Initially stopping for a police signal, arguing with officers, and then fleeing in a high speed chase wasn’t a “seizure” until he was arrested after the chase

FL5: Def made prima facie case that counsel’s abandoned search claim could have won; reversed

Defendant made a prima facie case at his post-conviction hearing. The evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing showed there was a reasonable probability that the motion to suppress would have been granted if pursued, and the evidence the State needed … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on FL5: Def made prima facie case that counsel’s abandoned search claim could have won; reversed

OH6: Trial court didn’t commit plain error in not inquiring into drug dog’s training when defense didn’t

The trial court did not commit plain error in not inquiring into the drug dogs training when defendant didn’t raise it. State v. Jones, 2019-Ohio-3704, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3777 (6th Dist. Sept. 16, 2019). The particulars of a drug … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Excessive force, Standards of review | Comments Off on OH6: Trial court didn’t commit plain error in not inquiring into drug dog’s training when defense didn’t

OR: Appeal of order of mother in juvenile case to provide UAs affirmed for an insufficient appellate record

The mother of a juvenile was ordered to give observed UAs as a part of a dependency-neglect proceeding. She didn’t provide a sufficient appellate record to decide whether the trial court’s order violated the state constitution, so it’s affirmed. Dep’t … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Drug or alcohol testing, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OR: Appeal of order of mother in juvenile case to provide UAs affirmed for an insufficient appellate record

IN: State’s motion to reconsider suppression order led to time for interlocutory appeal to run

The state’s motion to the trial court to reconsider its suppression order was denied. In the meanwhile, the time to seek interlocutory appeal of the suppression order lapsed. Appeal dismissed. State v. Fahringer, 2019 Ind. App. LEXIS 404 (Sept. 12, … Continue reading

Posted in Consent | Comments Off on IN: State’s motion to reconsider suppression order led to time for interlocutory appeal to run