W.D.N.C.: No REP in a police interview room

There was no reasonable expectation of privacy in a police interview room that was recording defendant without his knowledge. Foster v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65874 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 9, 2024).

Defendant can’t raise in his 2255 his Fourth Amendment claim that he was illegally recorded by the officer because he had the opportunity to do it before disposition. On the merits, he can’t possibly win because he ran the risk he’d be recorded by any officer he talked to. [Body cams? Dashcams?] United States v. Varnell, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64545 (W.D. Okla. Apr. 9, 2024).*

Franks motion fails: “In his Second Supplemental Response, Washington does not allege that any statements in the affidavit were either deliberately false or made with reckless disregard. Rather, he asks the Court to schedule a hearing to determine this issue. … Since Washington has failed to allege or offer proof that statements in the warrant affidavit were made deliberately or with reckless disregard, he is not entitled to a Franks hearing.” United States v. Washington, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66335 (S.D. Miss. Apr. 11, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.