CAAF: Victim’s 4A rights were at issue, too

The military court had to also consider the Fourth Amendment rights of the victim to sensitive information the accused sought access to for trial. All things considered, even if the court martial judge was wrong denying it, it was harmless error on this record. United States v. Braum, 2026 CAAF LEXIS 343 (C.A.A.F. Apr. 8, 2026).

The affidavit for warrant for a marijuana grow operation including a cell phone was issued with probable cause. It was reasonable to conclude that information about the grow operation would be on his cell phone. United States v. Koistinen, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78897 (D. Ariz. Apr. 8, 2026).*

“It is certainly true that Deputy Parker was in no rush to complete the warning citation, and the approximately seventeen minutes he took to do so here trends toward the outer limit of reasonableness in these circumstances. But for all the reasons previously discussed, the Court finds that the stop was not unlawfully prolonged. The motion to suppress is denied as to this ground.” United States v. Acosta, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78366 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 10, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Military searches, Nexus, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.