Daily Archives: July 15, 2020

N.D.Ohio: Patel doesn’t preclude motel operator’s consent

City of Los Angeles v. Patel not violated where motel owner voluntarily gives up information about renters. Jones v. Motel 6 Operating L.P., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122443 (N.D. Ohio July 13, 2020). Defendant’s traffic stop had basic questions that … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Patel doesn’t preclude motel operator’s consent

CA2: Lack of any justification for a stop distinguishes Strieff and finding arrest warrant wasn’t attenuated

The police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop defendant because about all they had was he was the same race as their suspect. Finding an outstanding arrest warrant didn’t attenuate the unreasonable stop. The lack of any justification for the stop … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation | Comments Off on CA2: Lack of any justification for a stop distinguishes Strieff and finding arrest warrant wasn’t attenuated

MI: Unlawfully extended probation can’t be used to justify a probation search

Where the trial court lacked the power to extend probation, a probation search during the unlawfully extended term was unreasonable. People v. Vanderpool, 2020 Mich. LEXIS 1207 (July 13, 2020). A probation search doesn’t violate the state constitution. State v. … Continue reading

Posted in Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on MI: Unlawfully extended probation can’t be used to justify a probation search

N.D.Ohio: Mere desire to cross-examine about the drug dog’s bona fides isn’t a Franks issue

Merely wanting to cross-examine about the reliability of the drug dog isn’t a Franks challenge. There still has to be a “substantial preliminary showing” of a falsity, and desire to cross-examine isn’t it. United States v. Robinson, 2020 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Mere desire to cross-examine about the drug dog’s bona fides isn’t a Franks issue

N.D.Ohio: Some discretion in inventories doesn’t make them unreasonable

The driver’s suspended DL was reason under policy to tow the car, and that led to a valid inventory. The inventory issue turned on whether a key was “readily available” to unlock the glove compartment, and a key found in … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory, Reasonableness | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Some discretion in inventories doesn’t make them unreasonable

D.Minn.: Motion to suppress denied for lack of specificity

Defendant’s motion to suppress is denied for lack of specificity. United States v. Zuniga-Garcia, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122220 (D. Minn. June 24, 2020). There was probable cause for the search warrant, despite the claimed Franks violation which was not … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Motion to suppress denied for lack of specificity

CA7: Factual mistake in state court opinion doesn’t justify habeas relief

A factual mistake in a state court’s decision on defendant’s Fourth Amendment claim for the inventory of his property still doesn’t merit habeas relief. Marling v. Littlejohn, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 21616 (7th Cir. July 13, 2020). Plaintiff’s claim for … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Inventory, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on CA7: Factual mistake in state court opinion doesn’t justify habeas relief

L.R. Article: The Questionable Objectivity of Fourth Amendment Law by Orin S. Kerr

The Questionable Objectivity of Fourth Amendment Law by Orin S. Kerr, forthcoming in 41 Tex. L. Rev. Abstract:

Posted in Reasonableness | Comments Off on L.R. Article: The Questionable Objectivity of Fourth Amendment Law by Orin S. Kerr