CA6: 4A doesn’t apply to removal of stuff from an inmate’s cell after a shakedown search

“Cody failed to state a Fourth Amendment claim for relief. He claimed that the defendants violated his Fourth Amendment rights by removing property from his cell during routine searches. But Cody was in prison, and ‘the Fourth Amendment proscription against unreasonable searches [and seizures] does not apply within the confines of the prison cell.’ Hudson, 468 U.S. at 526.” Cody v. Slusher, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 5940 (6th Cir. Mar. 9, 2018).*

The Alaska State Trooper’s affidavit for search was not materially false, so the Franks allegation fails. The tipster was corroborated, too, by finding that defendant did, in fact, travel to Mexico several times. The officer also said in the affidavit that he believed the x-ray image of the package showed heroin because he’d seen it several times before. United States v. Blodgett, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38448 (D. Alaska Mar. 8, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Prison and jail searches. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.