Daily Archives: January 20, 2025

CA9: Consent obtained by trickery is not voluntary

Consent obtained by trickery is not voluntary. United States v. Beland, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 1019 (9th Cir. Jan. 16, 2025). “[T]here is no indication from the record that the consent was in any way coerced, that Fiallos-Pena and Verganza … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Issue preclusion, Voluntariness | Comments Off on CA9: Consent obtained by trickery is not voluntary

NY3: Inventory didn’t comply with dept. policy and there was no full inventory

Defendant’s traffic stop was valid, but the state failed to show the impoundment complied with departmental policies. There was no evidence the vehicle was unsecured or unsafe if left at the scene. The inventory search failed to follow departmental procedures … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on NY3: Inventory didn’t comply with dept. policy and there was no full inventory

C.D.Cal.: Running criminal history of passenger unreasonably prolonged the stop

The stop was valid, but the stop was unreasonably prolonged without reasonable suspicion when running the criminal history of the passenger. That was not part of the incidents of the traffic stop. The frisk was also unreasonable. Also, “The Court … Continue reading

Posted in Independent source, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Running criminal history of passenger unreasonably prolonged the stop

D.Minn.: The fact a gun wasn’t found in def’s car doesn’t mean there wasn’t PC to search

“Defendant’s flight from law enforcement is, however, not the only basis to support the existence of probable cause to believe that evidence of a crime or contraband would be found in the Jeep. The probable cause to search the Jeep … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Automobile exception, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Minn.: The fact a gun wasn’t found in def’s car doesn’t mean there wasn’t PC to search

AR: “[T]he exclusionary rule—absent a showing of bad faith—does not apply in a revocation hearing.”

“[T]he exclusionary rule—absent a showing of bad faith—does not apply in a revocation hearing.” Wallace v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 19 (Jan. 15, 2025). An officer on patrol in a motel parking lot saw defendant’s car. They drove past each … Continue reading

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Probation / Parole search, Warrant papers | Comments Off on AR: “[T]he exclusionary rule—absent a showing of bad faith—does not apply in a revocation hearing.”

E.D.Tenn.: The alleged illegality of the later arrest doesn’t undo def’s abandonment in flight

Defendant fled, he said, in fear of his life, not knowing that it was the police. He abandoned property in flight. The fact the later arrest might turn out to be invalid doesn’t undo the abandonment. United States v. Ross, … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Arrest or entry on arrest, Inventory, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: The alleged illegality of the later arrest doesn’t undo def’s abandonment in flight

CA1: Report of a dead body in a house for a day didn’t justify warrantless entry

The police entered defendant’s home on a report of a dead body inside. They knew, however, the person was dead at least a day and likely wasn’t inside the home by then. The emergency exception did not apply. United States … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on CA1: Report of a dead body in a house for a day didn’t justify warrantless entry

CA1: SW was in good faith where affidavit was accidentally not filed with court

The Postal Inspector here prepared the search warrant affidavit, and the affidavit was to be incorporated with the warrant. The warrant was filed, however, by the USAO without the affidavit attached. The good faith exception applies. The officer did nothing … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA1: SW was in good faith where affidavit was accidentally not filed with court