Daily Archives: April 15, 2024

W.D.N.C.: No REP in a police interview room

There was no reasonable expectation of privacy in a police interview room that was recording defendant without his knowledge. Foster v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65874 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 9, 2024). Defendant can’t raise in his 2255 his Fourth … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on W.D.N.C.: No REP in a police interview room

TX2: No SW needed to get IMEI number of an abandoned cell phone to trace the owner

“Officers may open a cell phone abandoned at a crime scene to view non-electronic identifying information, such as the phone’s international mobile equipment identification (IMEI) number, and then use that identifying information to obtain a search warrant for the phone’s … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Cell phones, Standing | Comments Off on TX2: No SW needed to get IMEI number of an abandoned cell phone to trace the owner

W.D.Pa.: Affidavit for SW doesn’t have to say CI was reliable when the facts and circumstances alleged showed it

Defendant’s allegations of the police not saying in the warrant affidavit the CI was reliable doesn’t matter because the affidavit for warrant shows otherwise why the CI was credited. There was probable cause. To the extent this would be considered … Continue reading

Posted in Custody, Informant hearsay, Seizure | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Affidavit for SW doesn’t have to say CI was reliable when the facts and circumstances alleged showed it

S.D.N.Y.: GJ subpoena for cell phone passcode quashed.

The government’s grand jury subpoena for defendant’s cell phone passcode is quashed because it seeks testimonial information in violation of the Fifth Amendment showing defendant’s knowledge of the contents of the phone. “The Court denies Gray’s Rule 41(g) motion. Even … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Ineffective assistance, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: GJ subpoena for cell phone passcode quashed.

S.D.N.Y.: There’s a privacy interest in a cell phone passcode, but its disclosure here under a ruse does not lead to suppression

There is a privacy interest in one’s cell phone passode protected by the Fifth Amendment. Here, however, defendant’s disclosure of the passcode in responding to a CBP ruse after a flight from Mexico was not compulsion. United States v. Shvartsman, … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: There’s a privacy interest in a cell phone passcode, but its disclosure here under a ruse does not lead to suppression