Daily Archives: June 8, 2025

NM: Aguilar-Spinelli are still followed here and they were satisfied

Aguilar-Spinelli is still followed in New Mexico, and its strictures were met here. Motion to suppress properly denied, and court of appeals reversed. State v. Perea, 2025 N.M. LEXIS 91 (June 5, 2025):

Posted in Informant hearsay, State constitution | Comments Off on NM: Aguilar-Spinelli are still followed here and they were satisfied

D.Md.: Delaying three years to indict after seizure compromised defense enough that speedy trial was violated

Defendant’s backpack was searched in 2017, but he wasn’t indicted until 2020, and his case lingered. The officer’s testimony about the search is hazy and inconclusive enough that the court finds cause to dismiss for a speedy trial violation. The … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Excessive force, Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.Md.: Delaying three years to indict after seizure compromised defense enough that speedy trial was violated

CA9 en banc: It’s settled that shooting again a man with a knife who’s already down is excessive

On qualified immunity, it’s been settled for a decade that shooting and killing a man with a knife when he’s already down for the first four shots would be excessive force under Zion v. County of Orange, 874 F.3d 1072 … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9 en banc: It’s settled that shooting again a man with a knife who’s already down is excessive

D.Mass.: Pole camera law settled here, even if state court suggests it could differ somewhat

This court is bound by circuit authority from 2009 and 2022 en banc that pole camera surveillance is valid, even if this judge was sympathetic to the argument and the state court might rule differently. United States v. Crisostomo, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Pole cameras | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Pole camera law settled here, even if state court suggests it could differ somewhat

S.D.W.Va.: Paying “rent” in drugs is a business transaction didn’t give a REP here

Paying daily “rent” in drugs is a business transaction without standing. “Although Jackson was an overnight guest insofar as he slept on the couch in the living room, he told law enforcement officers in his interview that he paid McCallister … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonableness, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: Paying “rent” in drugs is a business transaction didn’t give a REP here