E.D.Wis.: Illegal patdown led to arrest and detention and confession which led to false ATF form; all suppressed because no intervening circumstance

“Defendant witnessed a crime. Rather than leaving the scene, he remained to talk to the police. The police then violated his Fourth Amendment rights by subjecting him to a suspicionless pat-down, and the ATF took advantage of his arrest on a state misdemeanor gun charge to further investigate him for federal firearms violations. The primary purpose of the exclusionary rule — to deter police overreaching — is served by suppressing not just the gun and defendant’s statements but also the additional evidence the ATF obtained as a result of defendant’s statements.” United States v. Ivory, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176033 (E.D. Wis. December 22, 2014).

Jardines doesn’t bar a trash pull from a trash container awaiting pickup on the sidewalk. United States v. Johnson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175815 (D. Nev. July 29, 2014).*

Police received a call about a felony assault the day before by a Javon in a red Monte Carlo who might be coming back to do it again. No weapon was involved in the incident. A BOLO went out, and the vehicle was shortly seen. The LPN came back to Javon Shackleford, the defendant. There was probable cause for the stop, and that included a search incident for a weapon. United States v. Shackleford, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176173 (W.D. Mo. December 5, 2014).*