Monthly Archives: November 2019

CT: Def counsel’s choice to distance def from bedroom with drug was reasonable

Defendant argued defense counsel was ineffective for not pursuing a motion to suppress the search of a bedroom he stayed in in the house of another. The testimony was conflicting. Defendant said that he had exclusive use of the bedroom, … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on CT: Def counsel’s choice to distance def from bedroom with drug was reasonable

CA3: Inevitable discovery applies because govt was drafting SW and there was “overwhelming” PC

Inevitable discovery applies: “The District Court based its decision to admit evidence from Restitullo’s apartment on three factors. First, police drafted the warrant application before Restitullo’s interrogation began. Second, ‘overwhelming’ probable cause existed to search Restitullo’s bedroom based on the … Continue reading

Posted in Inevitable discovery | Comments Off on CA3: Inevitable discovery applies because govt was drafting SW and there was “overwhelming” PC

CA1: Mere fact friend had possession of def’s bags didn’t show actual or apparent authority to consent

Defendant stored bags with a friend, and he ended up in jail. There was no actual or apparent authority shown for her to consent to search of the bags. The government carries the burden on both, and it fails. The … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority, Consent | Comments Off on CA1: Mere fact friend had possession of def’s bags didn’t show actual or apparent authority to consent

IN: Def’s raising GFE for first time in reply brief is waiver

It’s defendant’s burden in challenging a search warrant to raise both the defects in the warrant (such as a lack of probable cause) and inapplicability of the good faith exception. Raising the good faith exception in his reply brief is … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Good faith exception | Comments Off on IN: Def’s raising GFE for first time in reply brief is waiver

W.D.N.C.: Guilty plea waived 4A IAC claim

“The knowing and voluntary guilty plea waived all alleged ineffective assistance of counsel which preceded it, including counsel’s alleged deficiencies with regards to Fourth Amendment issues.” Allen v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205762 (W.D. N.C. Nov. 26, 2019). … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Ineffective assistance, Seizure | Comments Off on W.D.N.C.: Guilty plea waived 4A IAC claim

PA: Refusing to submit to BAC blood draw under SW supports obstruction of justice conviction

Refusal to submit to a blood draw search warrant for BAC supports a conviction for obstruction of justice. Commonwealth v. Palchanes, 2019 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1186 (Nov. 27, 2019). The CI’s basis of knowledge and reliability was adequately shown, and … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Third Party Doctrine, Warrant execution | Comments Off on PA: Refusing to submit to BAC blood draw under SW supports obstruction of justice conviction

TN: Def can’t show prejudice for IAC claim for failing to call a witness he can’t identify or summarize testimony of

Defendant filed a post-conviction petition alleging that a necessary witness hadn’t been called for the suppression hearing. He could not, however, provide any decent information about name, where she could be found, what she would say, or that it would … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on TN: Def can’t show prejudice for IAC claim for failing to call a witness he can’t identify or summarize testimony of

OH8: State’s losing exhibits from suppression hearing requires new trial

Appellant appeals the denial of his suppression motion, but a bunch of the exhibits are missing. The state relies on precedent that it’s the appellant’s obligation to bring up a record. The state, however, somehow got Exhibits 1-23 back and … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on OH8: State’s losing exhibits from suppression hearing requires new trial

CO holds four months of pole camera surveillance of def’s fenced-in backyard was unreasonable and violated 4A

Four months of warrantless and continuous pole camera surveillance of defendant’s fenced-in back yard was unreasonable and violated his reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment. People v. Tafoya, 2019 COA 176, 2019 Colo. App. LEXIS 1799 (Nov. 27, … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras | Comments Off on CO holds four months of pole camera surveillance of def’s fenced-in backyard was unreasonable and violated 4A

FL follows Mitchell on blood draws from the unconscious

The Florida Supreme Court granted a certified question of public importance on whether a search warrant was required to draw blood from an unconscious motorist in the hospital. In the meantime, SCOTUS decided Mitchell v. Wisconsin. This court applies Mitchell … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on FL follows Mitchell on blood draws from the unconscious

KS: Officer’s reinitating contact during stop and leaning into window with hands on door meant to driver he wasn’t free to leave

Officer’s reinitiating contact with driver, leaning on window and asking about asking more questions on the totality signaled to defendant he wasn’t free to leave. State v. Gonzalez, 2019 Kan. App. LEXIS 85 (Nov. 27, 2019):

Posted in Seizure | Comments Off on KS: Officer’s reinitating contact during stop and leaning into window with hands on door meant to driver he wasn’t free to leave

WaPo: Maryland police drones aid in searches, crash investigations, but raise privacy concerns

WaPo: Maryland police drones aid in searches, crash investigations, but raise privacy concerns by Alison Knezevich:

Posted in Drones | Comments Off on WaPo: Maryland police drones aid in searches, crash investigations, but raise privacy concerns

IL: Once def was acquitted, seized computer data should have been returned, not searched again without a warrant

Defendant was a Peoria police officer being accused of sexual assault, and the Illinois State Police obtained a search warrant for his computer and other devices. The hard drives were copied with EnCase software. Defendant was tried on the sexual … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Scope of search, Warrant execution | Comments Off on IL: Once def was acquitted, seized computer data should have been returned, not searched again without a warrant

E.D.N.C.: “[R]easonable suspicion need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct.” Navarette

A brief meeting for what could only be described by the officer, in his experience, was likely a hand-to-hand sale in a high crime area reasonable suspicion for a stop. “Other suggested explanations by defendant, such as that defendant may … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on E.D.N.C.: “[R]easonable suspicion need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct.” Navarette

Daily Beast: Trump Is First to Use PATRIOT Act to Detain a Man Forever

Daily Beast: Trump Is First to Use PATRIOT Act to Detain a Man Forever by Spencer Ackerman (“Never in 18 years has the government used Section 412 of the PATRIOT Act, which permits indefinite detention of resident aliens on national-security … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest | Comments Off on Daily Beast: Trump Is First to Use PATRIOT Act to Detain a Man Forever

D.Guam: 4A standing is not jurisdictional, so the court can go to GFE without deciding PC

Standing to contest a search and seizure issue is not jurisdictional, so the court doesn’t have to decide standing. Going to the merits, there was probable cause for the search warrant for the package arriving by mail, and the delay … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Guam: 4A standing is not jurisdictional, so the court can go to GFE without deciding PC

CA6: SW’s PC doesn’t even have to be decided if affidavit falls within “heartland” of GFE

The affidavit for this search warrant could have been more detailed, but it doesn’t necessarily show it to be weak. Nevertheless, the court doesn’t even have to decide probable cause because this case falls within the “heartland” of the good … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA6: SW’s PC doesn’t even have to be decided if affidavit falls within “heartland” of GFE

CA6: Alleged violation of discovery order by unauthorized possession of Jencks material justifies search of jail cell, not that there’s a REP in it anyway

Alleged violation of a protective order on discovery authorized a search of defendant’s jail cell and a search warrant for his mother’s home after he mailed it to her to copy and disseminate. The protective order itself justified the search … Continue reading

Posted in Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on CA6: Alleged violation of discovery order by unauthorized possession of Jencks material justifies search of jail cell, not that there’s a REP in it anyway

NY1: Def showed that multifamily use of premises was permitted, not that it was such at time of search

The warrant was sufficiently particular because the premises was apparently occupied by a single family. The city authorized it to be a multifamily dwelling, but there’s nothing at the suppression hearing that shows that it was used that way at … Continue reading

Posted in Particularity | Comments Off on NY1: Def showed that multifamily use of premises was permitted, not that it was such at time of search

D.S.D.: Def’s claim at arrest that he was confused about the age of the person he was meeting was a trial question, not a PC question

There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest for attempted sex trafficking a minor. He said during his post-arrest interview that he was confused by the internet ad that he was responding to, but that doesn’t undermine probable cause. United States … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.S.D.: Def’s claim at arrest that he was confused about the age of the person he was meeting was a trial question, not a PC question