CA10: Admission of CSLI evidence requires a witness for confrontation purposes

CSLI information obtained by warrant still requires a witness to explain them for confrontation purposes. State v. Lawson, 2020-Ohio-3004, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 1952 (10th Dist. May 19, 2020).

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress CSLI three years before Carpenter. Moreover, it was obtained by search warrant. United States v. Curry, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87783 (E.D. Mich. May 19, 2020).*

2254 petitioner can’t raise his Fourth Amendment in habeas. It was raised at trial and the subject of his direct appeal. Biggs v. Inch, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87937 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 3, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Admissibility of evidence, Cell site location information, Issue preclusion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.