Daily Archives: August 4, 2020

TX14: There has to be a fact dispute to get an art. 38.23(a) jury instruction on legality of search

“‘To raise a disputed fact issue warranting an article 38.23(a) jury instruction, there must be some affirmative evidence that puts the existence of that fact into question.’ Madden, 242 S.W.3d at 513. In other words, a cross examiner cannot create … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on TX14: There has to be a fact dispute to get an art. 38.23(a) jury instruction on legality of search

Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division

Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division by Jacob Sullum (“The charges, which grew out of a lethal 2019 raid based on a fraudulent search warrant affidavit, suggest that cops routinely built their … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division

CA1: Inventory was shown to be investigative; suppression affirmed

“All in all, it seems inescapable that the officers seized Del Rosario’s car so that they could search it for evidence of a crime, and that they later sought to justify the search by invoking the community-caretaking exception. And while … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Inventory | Comments Off on CA1: Inventory was shown to be investigative; suppression affirmed

W.D.N.Y.: USMJ’s credibility determination is entitled to deference

While review of the R&R is de novo, the USMJ’s credibility determination on a motion to suppress is still entitled to deference. United States v. Angulo-Gomez, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137199 (W.D. N.Y. Aug. 3, 2020). The government argued that … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: USMJ’s credibility determination is entitled to deference

D.Nev.: Denial of medical care after arrest can be a 4A violation, but this doesn’t measure up

“To the extent Plaintiff is asserting a denial of medical care after his arrest, but before he arrived at the detention facility, district courts within the Ninth Circuit have held that law enforcement officers are required to provide objectively reasonable … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on D.Nev.: Denial of medical care after arrest can be a 4A violation, but this doesn’t measure up

CA3: Suspended DL arrest was valid despite fact it was later dismissed in state court

Defendant’s arrest for driving on a suspended license was valid and with probable cause despite the fact he later got the charge dismissed. Bahgat v. Twp. of E. Brunswick, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 24326 (3d Cir. Aug. 3, 2020). Officers … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA3: Suspended DL arrest was valid despite fact it was later dismissed in state court

OH3: Collins v. Virginia not retroactive on post-conviction relief

Defendant’s claim that Collins v. Virginia applied on post-conviction is denied. The search was two years before Collins was decided, and trial and appeal were over by then. It isn’t retroactive to final cases. State v. Parsons, 2020-Ohio-3917, 2020 Ohio … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OH3: Collins v. Virginia not retroactive on post-conviction relief

OH3: Unsigned SW still entitled to GFE

Even though the search warrant wasn’t signed in violation of the state rule, the good faith exception applies because the issuing judge found probable cause and said he issued the warrant. State v. Harrison, 2020-Ohio-3920, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 2821 … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Warrant execution | Comments Off on OH3: Unsigned SW still entitled to GFE

Bloomberg Law: Protester Surveillance May Test Constitutional Privacy in Courts

Bloomberg Law: Protester Surveillance May Test Constitutional Privacy in Courts by Julia Weng & Daniel R. Stoller:

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Bloomberg Law: Protester Surveillance May Test Constitutional Privacy in Courts