Daily Archives: January 19, 2020

The Sun / Reason: Family sue TSA after man, 79, has $82K life savings he kept in tupperware box seized at airport for ‘no reason’

The Sun (UK): Family sue TSA after man, 79, has $82K life savings he kept in tupperware box seized at airport for ‘no reason’ by Fionnuala O’Leary (“A FAMILY are suing the TSA after an elderly man’s $82K life savings … Continue reading

Posted in Forfeiture | Comments Off on The Sun / Reason: Family sue TSA after man, 79, has $82K life savings he kept in tupperware box seized at airport for ‘no reason’

VA: Search of speeder’s purse violated Gant and denied sovereign immunity

Plaintiff was arrested and in handcuffs in a police car for speeding. The officer searched her purse in the car, and all this was post-Gant and no evidence of speeding would be found in the purse. This was beyond mere … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Search incident | Comments Off on VA: Search of speeder’s purse violated Gant and denied sovereign immunity

M.D.Ala.: No constitutional requirement that the SW be served on the target of the search, so the missing attachment didn’t matter

There is no constitutional requirement that the search warrant be served on the target of the search, so the missing attachment didn’t matter. “As stated above, the record demonstrates with reasonable certainty that a warrant stating with particularity the items … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Warrant execution | Comments Off on M.D.Ala.: No constitutional requirement that the SW be served on the target of the search, so the missing attachment didn’t matter

D.N.J.: What witnesses to call at a suppression hearing is strategic call under Strickland

Defendant wasn’t prejudiced by not calling his codefendant wife at the suppression hearing. Her declaration was already before the court, and nothing more could be added. What witnesses to call, even in a suppression hearing, is a Strickland strategic decision. … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on D.N.J.: What witnesses to call at a suppression hearing is strategic call under Strickland

CA1: No exigency for warrantless entry on a DV complaint even with a known gun in the house, and unconnected to the complaint

PR police were called to a DV situation involving a police officer as a suspect. The officer’s firearm did not factor into the DV complaint, and the argument wasn’t even face-to-face. The mere fact of a gun in the house … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on CA1: No exigency for warrantless entry on a DV complaint even with a known gun in the house, and unconnected to the complaint

CA11: Two CoAs denied same day

Defendant lost his search issue on appeal. On 2255 he argues that it could have been argued better. [The opinion doesn’t say how.] It he lost on the merits of a Fourth Amendment claim, that’s binding on 2255 for lack … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on CA11: Two CoAs denied same day

C.D.Ill.: SW for premises need not state the owner’s name

Defendant was observed doing four controlled buys, and he went back to his girlfriend’s house in her car each time. “Defendant contends that the affidavit lacked probable cause because it did not state who owned the Residence, whether Defendant lived … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on C.D.Ill.: SW for premises need not state the owner’s name

NYTimes: Does the F.B.I. Need Apple to Hack Into iPhones?

NYTimes: Does the F.B.I. Need Apple to Hack Into iPhones? By Jack Nicas (“There are tools to crack into the phones at the center of a new dispute over encryption. But the F.BI. says it still needs Apple’s aid.”)

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges, Surveillance technology | Comments Off on NYTimes: Does the F.B.I. Need Apple to Hack Into iPhones?

MO: When there’s one black phone to be seized and searched, that’s all the SW needs to describe

Identifying the thing to be searched as a “black Samsung cell phone with a black case” was specific enough without including the phone number or serial number when there was only one in hand. State v. Bales, 2020 Mo. App. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Particularity | Comments Off on MO: When there’s one black phone to be seized and searched, that’s all the SW needs to describe

D.S.D.: Cross corroboration of three CIs’ stories was PC

The cross corroboration of three CIs’ stories was probable cause. United States v. Wilford, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6074 (D.S.D. Jan. 14, 2020). “The officers had probable cause to arrest Mancilla-Ibarra because Fann’s information was veritable, reliable, and corroborated.” The … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on D.S.D.: Cross corroboration of three CIs’ stories was PC

LA5: There is no separate exigency requirement for the trunk of a car under the AE

There is no separate exigency requirement for the search of an automobile’s trunk then a need to get a search warrant. The trial court erred in granting the motion to suppress. State v. Lacrosse, 2020 La. App. LEXIS 51 (La. … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception | Comments Off on LA5: There is no separate exigency requirement for the trunk of a car under the AE

D.Conn.: Allegedly not understanding a potential 4A claim isn’t grounds to set aside plea months later

“On the record before the Court, Mr. Rivera’s belatedly asserted misapprehension regarding possible Fourth Amendment claims does not provide a basis for permitting him to withdraw his guilty plea.” [The court doesn’t even mention the merits of such a motion.] … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on D.Conn.: Allegedly not understanding a potential 4A claim isn’t grounds to set aside plea months later