D.Utah: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in false arrest civil cases

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in false arrest civil cases. Linin v. Neff, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51836 (D. Utah. Mar. 18, 2021). [In fact, it may be the crux of the case.]

Probable cause was shown for a search of defendant’s cell phone, and it wasn’t stale. “[P]robable cause is not to be determined by counting the number of days between the occurrence of the events relied upon and the issuance of the search warrant. Information may be acted upon as long as the practicalities dictate that a state of facts existing in the past, which is sufficient to give rise to probable cause, continues to exist at the time the application for a search warrant is made ….” “Defendant’s related contention that the search warrant failed to meet the particularity requirement is unpreserved.” People v. Conley, 2021 NY Slip Op 01676, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1733 (4th Dept. Mar. 19, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Exclusionary rule, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.