Daily Archives: September 24, 2019

The Hill: Basic biometrics: Why this emerging technology must be regulated now

The Hill: Basic biometrics: Why this emerging technology must be regulated now by Adam Leval:

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on The Hill: Basic biometrics: Why this emerging technology must be regulated now

D.Minn.: Car being stuck in snow and key fob not there doesn’t nullify application of the automobile exception

A car stuck in the snow at the end of the alley and defendant without the key fob is still mobile for the automobile exception. “Any temporary loss of mobility is insufficient to take Williams’s case outside the automobile exception.” … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Car being stuck in snow and key fob not there doesn’t nullify application of the automobile exception

TN: Belated writ of error coram nobis can’t be used in state court to challenge search that already was used in a federal case too to attempt to undo the federal case

Petitioner appears to be attempting to challenge his federal conviction in state court in a parallel criminal proceeding where the same search was used in both cases. He’s attempting to challenge the search in state court by writ of error … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on TN: Belated writ of error coram nobis can’t be used in state court to challenge search that already was used in a federal case too to attempt to undo the federal case

CA9: QI: without a case almost on point, you lose

A typical Fourth Amendment qualified immunity outcome on appeal: You need a case that’s obvious or a case substantially on point. Without it, you lose. Sightler v. Nisleit, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 28702 (9th Cir. Sept. 23, 2019)*:

Posted in Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: QI: without a case almost on point, you lose

CA9: When defendant is being “detained” and not under arrest, search incident doesn’t apply

The inventory of defendant’s vehicle violated LVMPD’s limited inventory policy, and it is found unreasonable. The government’s search incident alternative wasn’t presented to the trial court. Even assuming it was not waived, this was during a “detention” on less than … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep, Search incident | Comments Off on CA9: When defendant is being “detained” and not under arrest, search incident doesn’t apply