E.D.N.Y.: Losing one’s cell phone at the scene of the crime is a loss of any reasonable expectation of privacy in it

A defendant who loses his cell phone at the scene of a crime has abandoned it by not safeguarding his privacy. This was 2009, and, besides, Riley doesn’t apply to abandoned phones. United States v. Quashie, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21841 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 13, 2016).

The rough neighborhood with three guns seized in recent weeks there and a shots fired call, gang turf struggles in that block, and defendant’s heavy coat not matching the weather was all reasonable suspicion for defendant’s patdown. United States v. Dortch, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21191 (D.Neb. Feb. 19, 2016),* R&R 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176385 (D. Neb. Nov. 4, 2015).*

Defense counsel was not ineffective for not moving to suppress a search that was, by all accounts, by defendant’s mother’s consent. Moreover, there is evidence that the gun was in plain view. Since he could not win a motion to suppress, there was no prejudice. Beale v. United States, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22522 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 24, 2016).*