Monthly Archives: August 2026

FL3: Frisk can occur immediately after stop

The stop was with reasonable suspicion, and the frisk can occur immediately. The trial court’s holding it couldn’t has no support in law. State v. Lyles, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 5911 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 5, 2026). The CI was … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on FL3: Frisk can occur immediately after stop

S.D.Ohio: Drug dog sticking head partially into open door area was at least with reasonable suspicion

“[W]here a dog only partially and briefly pokes their head into the interior of a vehicle, as Cody did here, such does not constitute a search. Fellmy, 165 F.4th at 506 (citing Caballes, 543 U.S. at 408-09) (finding a dog … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: Drug dog sticking head partially into open door area was at least with reasonable suspicion

D.Me.: Failure of drug dog to alert is a factor in totality

The failure of the drug dog to alert doesn’t completely undermine probable case, but it is a factor in the totality of circumstances. Here, the government didn’t meet its burden. United States v. Presby, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172828 (D. … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Me.: Failure of drug dog to alert is a factor in totality

M.D.Fla.: Package covered by anticipatory warrant was moved to another house, and exigency permitted warrantless entry to seize

In this anticipatory warrant case, the package was delivered to the target residence but then moved to another residence. That created exigent circumstances for entry without a warrant. Officers also did a protective sweep and retreated to get a search … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Package covered by anticipatory warrant was moved to another house, and exigency permitted warrantless entry to seize

E.D.N.Y.: SW request to search cell phone seized two months earlier was unreasonable

“The government seeks a warrant to search two cellular phones that have been in its possession for more than two months since the time to execute a prior search warrant lapsed. In United States v. Smith, 967 F.3d 198 (2d … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Reasonableness, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: SW request to search cell phone seized two months earlier was unreasonable

IN Tax: 4A claim over order to enter for tax assessment moot where it didn’t happen

There was an order to enter the taxpayer’s property for an assessment; however, the entry never occurred, so the Fourth Amendment issue is moot. Bolte v. Dubois Cty. Assessor, 2026 Ind. Tax LEXIS 35 (T.C. Aug. 3, 2026). “The record … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Mootness, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on IN Tax: 4A claim over order to enter for tax assessment moot where it didn’t happen

Reason: Kansas Lawsuit: ALPRs Turn a License Plate Into the ‘Functional Equivalent’ of a ‘GPS Tracking Device’

Reason: Kansas Lawsuit: ALPRs Turn a License Plate Into the ‘Functional Equivalent’ of a ‘GPS Tracking Device’ by Jacob Sullum (“The Kansas Justice Institute argues that Wichita’s ‘warrantless ALPR dragnet surveillance program’ violates the state constitution’s privacy protections.”).

Posted in Automatic license plate readers | Comments Off on Reason: Kansas Lawsuit: ALPRs Turn a License Plate Into the ‘Functional Equivalent’ of a ‘GPS Tracking Device’

MI: Suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings

A suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings, and defendant was unrepresented at that point due to disagreements with first retained and then appointed counsel. Remanded. The pretrial motions in general were disorganized, and the Fourth Amendment claim … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Privileges, Qualified immunity, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on MI: Suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings

S.D.W.Va.: Admission to a little marijuana in backpack didn’t justify search of her car trunk

Defendant’s admission to the officers she had a little marijuana in her backpack didn’t justify a search of the trunk. United States v. Bowling, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169576 (S.D. W. Va. July 30, 2026). Plaintiff’s § 1983 false arrest … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Burden of pleading, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: Admission to a little marijuana in backpack didn’t justify search of her car trunk

CA7: Controlled buy justified stop, dog sniff, and search

The controlled buy off defendant gave probable cause to search his car after he left it, irrespective of an alleged pretextual traffic stop and use of a drug dog. United States v. Randle, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 22657 (7th Cir. … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Automobile exception, Dog sniff, Issue preclusion, Privileges, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA7: Controlled buy justified stop, dog sniff, and search

WaPo: How rogue officers turned a nationwide camera network into a tool for stalking

WaPo: How rogue officers turned a nationwide camera network into a tool for stalking by Drew Harwell, Douglas MacMillan and Aaron Schaffer (“Flock’s array of license-plate cameras was built to fight crime. But at least 50 law enforcement officers were … Continue reading

Posted in Automatic license plate readers | Comments Off on WaPo: How rogue officers turned a nationwide camera network into a tool for stalking

Cal.1: Search condition for mental health diversion was within court’s discretion

The trial court acted within its statutory discretion imposing a search condition on defendant during his mental health diversion. His criminal history justified it. Thompson v. Superior Court, 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 459 (1st Dist. July 30, 2026). One defendant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Probation / Parole search, Standing | Comments Off on Cal.1: Search condition for mental health diversion was within court’s discretion