WA: Probation search of iPod without RS was unconstitutional

A probation search of an iPod without a warrant was improper under state law. The statute doesn’t help the court, but the department’s rules do, and they limit searches to a potential offense being investigated and this was not. Thus, such a broad search power of electronic devices violates the state constitution. State v. Jardinez, 2014 Wash. App. LEXIS 2692 (November 18, 2014). [I personally think the result should be the same under the Fourth Amendment, considering the policy considerations of Riley.]

Defendant violated a parole condition of no driving by getting in a car and driving away from the parole office. This parole violation did not grant carte blanche to conduct a parole search of the car. United States v. Jackson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162700 (M.D. Pa. November 20, 2014).

The police made two warrantless entries into one defendant’s hotel room: one for a protective sweep and one to watch him remove his belongings. A search warrant was obtained on other information, and there was no evidence of a search in the prior entries. Therefore, the search warrant is based on an independent source. United States v. Kenniston, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162590 (D. Nev. November 20, 2014).*

There was probable cause for the issuance of the arrest warrant for defendant, and the search of his car was with probable cause because of a dog alert. State v. Smith, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 2747 (La.App. 2 Cir. November 19, 2014).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Cell phones, Independent source, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.