S.D.N.Y.: 15 months not too long to make cell phone search and review unreasonable

Fifteen months to review a cell phone search “was accomplished in a reasonable amount of time. Although a review period of fifteen months is ‘certainly not brief,’ it was not unreasonably long considering ‘the challenges of searching ESI from electronic devices’ and the Government’s multiple attempts to extract the data in a reviewable format. United States v. Daskal, 676 F. Supp. 3d 153, 178-79 (E.D.N.Y. 2023) (finding that a review period of 23 months was reasonable). Moreover, courts in this Circuit regularly find that similarly lengthy review periods are reasonable. …” United States v. Fofanah, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74575 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 18, 2025).

Smell of marijuana from defendant’s car was probable cause for an automobile exception search. United States v. Warfield, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73725 (W.D. La. Apr. 1, 2025),* adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72831 (W.D. La. Apr. 16, 2025).*

No Franks hearing: “This time, though, Hitchcock misreads the affidavit. It did not purport to state that [Officer] Jousma had seen the drugs. It stated only that Jousma ‘observed Hitchcock do what appeared to be a hand to hand drug transaction.’” Probable cause was shown. United States v. Hitchcock, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 9252 (6th Cir. Apr. 17, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.