TX2: How a SW is executed is always an issue

Under Schmerber, how a search for blood is conducted is always an issue, not just whether it was done under a search warrant. Here, just because the blood draw was in a police station does not make it unreasonable per se. State v. Johnston, 305 S.W.3d 746 (Tex. App.—Ft. Worth 2009):

The trial court found that the seizure of appellee’s blood “violated the Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness requirement by not being taken by medical personnel in a hospital or medical environment.” [Emphasis added.] However, most cases interpreting Schmerber do not read it so narrowly as to restrict the location of a blood draw to a hospital or clinic only. Draws taken in jails and sheriff’s offices have been upheld as reasonable. Here, there was extensive testimony that the trial court found to be credible as to the “clean” and appropriate nature of the room in which the blood draw was taken. Accordingly, we conclude that the location of the draw was not inherently unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment or Schmerber simply by virtue of it occurring in the clean room at the police station as opposed to a “medical environment.”

There likely is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a hotel room rented with a stolen credit card, so the trial court’s termination of the suppression hearing without resolving this question is reversed. State v. Delvechio, 301 Ga. App. 560, 687 S.E.2d 845 (2009).*

Defendant’s car search was not justifiable under Gant, but it was with PC for a bank robbery, and that was enough. United States v. Singletary, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104639 (W.D. La. November 10, 2009).*

The fact an IP address is linked to child porn and then to defendant’s home is enough to issue a search warrant. United States v. Massey, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104657 (E.D. Mo. November 10, 2009):

This Court finds that, even accepting the assertion that the IP address could have been hijacked by a third party, the Affidavit provided probable cause to find that evidence of child pornography would be at 7378 Hazel Avenue. This is because the search warrant affidavit established that, through his use of peer-to-peer file sharing software, Sgt. Kavanaugh observed over twenty videos of child pornography (identified by hash value) on a computer with IP address 68.188.82.208 on May 13, 2008 at 1:15:19, which was associated with the account of Ken Massey (defendant’s father) at 7378 Hazel Avenue. Defendant’s objection will be overruled.

[Posted 11/14]