Daily Archives: September 3, 2020

CA9: Bulk data collection under FISA violates 4A and defs were entitled to notice of it; no exclusion, however

Bulk data collection under FISA violated the Fourth Amendment. A criminal defendant is entitled to notice of FISA collection. However, exclusion not applied in this case because defendants weren’t prejudiced. United States v. Moalin, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28119 (9th … Continue reading

Posted in FISA, National security | Comments Off on CA9: Bulk data collection under FISA violates 4A and defs were entitled to notice of it; no exclusion, however

New LR article: Local Police Surveillance and the Administrative Fourth Amendment

Mailyn Fidler, Local Police Surveillance and the Administrative Fourth Amendment, 36 Santa Clara High Tech. L.J. 481 (2020).

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on New LR article: Local Police Surveillance and the Administrative Fourth Amendment

W.D.Mo.: Mask ordinance doesn’t violate 4A right of privacy

The City of Springfield mask ordinance does not violate, inter alia, the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. Shelton v. City of Springfield, 6:20-cv-03258 (W.D. Mo. Sept. 2, 2020). “In specifically detailing the criminal conduct under investigation, the search warrants provide … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Particularity, Reasonableness, Scope of search | Comments Off on W.D.Mo.: Mask ordinance doesn’t violate 4A right of privacy

D.Alaska: SW for cell phone was broad; it had to be, but not unreasonably so

The search of defendant’s cell phone did not unreasonably exceed the search warrant for it which was necessarily broad. “As a threshold matter, the search did not exceed the scope of the warrant. Without contesting the validity of the warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Scope of search | Comments Off on D.Alaska: SW for cell phone was broad; it had to be, but not unreasonably so

TN: A security guard’s state license is not “state action” for 4A

A state licensed private security guard was not a state actor under the Fourth Amendment when he searched defendant’s cell phone trying to determine the owner. State v. Simpson, 2020 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 594 (Sept. 1, 2020). “Additionally, we … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Private search | Comments Off on TN: A security guard’s state license is not “state action” for 4A

CA11: Telling ptf to move along wasn’t a 4A seizure

“Here, Watkins did not state a plausible claim that Willson violated his Fourth Amendment rights because Willson did not arrest him, detain him, or restrain his movement. Instead, Willson gave Watkins notice to leave the premises, as required by Florida … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Seizure | Comments Off on CA11: Telling ptf to move along wasn’t a 4A seizure