Monthly Archives: January 2026

M.D.Pa.: CSAM PC allegations never go stale

Child pornography probable cause allegations, especially those on a computer have a “long shelf life” and virtually never go stale. United States v. Picca, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 267611 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 30, 2025). Plaintiff alleged enough to proceed past … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Probable cause, Staleness | Comments Off on M.D.Pa.: CSAM PC allegations never go stale

CA10: Protective sweep of car was valid despite presence of six officers; def would get back in car

There was reasonable suspicion enough potential for dangerousness for a protective sweep of defendant’s car. “The district court’s dangerousness analysis relied on four factors: (1) Raban’s gang affiliation, (2) the high-crime and rival-gang neighborhood, (3) Armstrong’s presence, and (4) Raban’s … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority, Cell phones, Probable cause, Protective sweep | Comments Off on CA10: Protective sweep of car was valid despite presence of six officers; def would get back in car

Kavanaugh Stops #4

Reason: Did Brett Kavanaugh Just Apologize for Butchering the Fourth Amendment? Maybe. by Damon Root (“Puzzling over a curious omission from the conservative justice”):

Posted in immigration stops, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on Kavanaugh Stops #4

Reason: DHS Says REAL ID, Which DHS Certifies, Is Too Unreliable To Confirm U.S. Citizenship

Reason: DHS Says REAL ID, Which DHS Certifies, Is Too Unreliable To Confirm U.S. Citizenship by C.J. Ciaramella*:

Posted in immigration stops | Comments Off on Reason: DHS Says REAL ID, Which DHS Certifies, Is Too Unreliable To Confirm U.S. Citizenship

DE: Failure to file a pretrial motion to suppress is waiver with no plain error review

Failure to file a pretrial motion to suppress is waiver, and it will not be considered on plain error review, and for good reason. Swanson v. State, 2025 Del. LEXIS 504 (Dec. 31, 2025):

Posted in Motion to suppress, Waiver | Comments Off on DE: Failure to file a pretrial motion to suppress is waiver with no plain error review

CA9: Evidence seized by state not taken or used by feds not subject to Rule 41(g)

State officers seized defendant’s Rolex watch in a search, and there was a federal prosecution, but the watch was never part of it nor evidence of anything. Thus, Rule 41(g) affords him no relief here. There’s no constructive federal possession … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Nexus, Prison and jail searches, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA9: Evidence seized by state not taken or used by feds not subject to Rule 41(g)