Daily Archives: April 26, 2024

E.D.Ky.: When court can’t tell the dog alerted, motion to suppress granted

The court reviewing the dashcam video repeatedly cannot tell that the dog alerts at all. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Edmonds, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74570 (E.D. Ky. Apr. 24, 2024). Update: techdirt: Court To Cops: If We … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Dog sniff, Good faith exception | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: When court can’t tell the dog alerted, motion to suppress granted

OH1: A malnourished child isn’t exigency for an infant

“The facts of this case are more akin to the situation in Fisher. While a report of a malnourished infant is certainly cause for concern, no one testified that that the infant would not survive without immediate medical intervention. Rather, … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OH1: A malnourished child isn’t exigency for an infant

E.D.Pa.: Mandamus doesn’t lie to unseal SW papers

A petition for writ of mandamus doesn’t lie parallel to an action before the USMJ to unseal search warrant materials. Martino v. United States Dist. Court for the E. Dist. of Pa., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74349 (E.D. Pa. Apr. … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing, Warrant papers | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Mandamus doesn’t lie to unseal SW papers

D.Me.: Looking around house when allegedly “freezing” it was an illegal search

In an apparent attempt to “freeze” defendant’s residence after they took him away, they found marijuana while looking around. Up to that point, they had no inkling there was marijuana in the house. That search was unreasonable, and the motion … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Me.: Looking around house when allegedly “freezing” it was an illegal search

OR: Police listening to attorney-client jail calls because attorney calls not properly segregated leads to dismissal of some counts and setting aside guilty plea

The jail computer controlled phone system did not properly block attorney-client telephone calls, and the police listened to defense counsel’s conversations with defendant in jail. The police then used that information to supersede the indictment. Prejudice is presumed. State v. … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Burden of pleading, Prison and jail searches, Privileges, Standing | Comments Off on OR: Police listening to attorney-client jail calls because attorney calls not properly segregated leads to dismissal of some counts and setting aside guilty plea