A 14 month delay in getting a search warrant for DNA evidence in defendant’s house was not stale. DNA evidence doesn’t quickly degrade indoors, and it was still likely to be found. State v. Lantz, 21 Neb. App. 679, 842 N.W.2d 216 (2014):

Continue reading →

A search in Mexico was authorized by defendant’s landlord, which Mexican officers believed was valid and represented it to be valid. It’s not clear it was valid, but, assuming the search was invalid, the good faith exception still applies. State v. Johnson, 2013 WI App 140, 352 Wis. 2d 98, 841 N.W.2d 302 (2013):

Continue reading →

The state did not raise abandonment or disclaimer by defendant of his backpack in the trial court. The record is not sufficiently developed for a decision on those grounds as alternate theories because the defense wasn’t on notice to litigate and put on facts. Therefore, those arguments are rejected because the court posits many things not resolved. State v. Stinstrom, 2014 Ore. App. LEXIS 199 (February 20, 2014):

Continue reading →

Defendant’s stop was based on a mistake as to the LPN he called in which came back stolen. Therefore, the stop was unjustified, and the plain view of drugs in the backseat couldn’t be sustained. The officer’s mistake of fact here couldn’t be “reasonable.” State v. Creed, 2014 Wash. App. LEXIS 388 (February 20, 2014).

Defendant wasn’t entitled to the name of the CI in his prosecution for possession after a search warrant was executed because the controlled buy from the house wasn’t the basis of the prosecution. However, the officer could testify that others apparently had access to the house for that purpose. In addition, defense counsel was not ineffective for not raising the issue of who was responsible for the controlled buy because it would have opened the door to other potential buys coming out, and that was a valid strategic choice. King v. State, 2014 Ga. App. LEXIS 74 (February 21, 2014).*

Officers had probable cause for defendant’s BAC test despite his passing the field sobriety tests because of his significant moving violation, the odor of alcohol, and his admission to drinking “more than [he] should have.” Trial court and court of appeals (State v. Bell, 2012 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 679 (August 31, 2012)) reversed. State v. Bell, 2014 Tenn. LEXIS 121 (February 20, 2014):

Continue reading →

Officers had information that a shirtless black male in blue jeans with red shoes had twice jumped out of the window of an apartment that wasn’t his and fled. The apartment had been broken into. When they saw a man matching the description, he could be stopped. When he fled it rose to probable cause. State v. Foreman, 2014-Ohio-626, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 625 (2d Dist. February 21, 2014).

Ohio treats people just arrested and giving information on others the same as anonymous tips. This one was uncorroborated and did not provide reasonable suspicion. State v. Robinson, 2014-Ohio-579, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 556 (9th Dist. February 19, 2014).

Defendant’s girlfriend sent a text to her aunt saying “help,” and the police were called. She was bloody as was her boyfriend. She gave them a key to check out the house. The emergency aid exception applied. State v. Methvin, 2014-Ohio-590, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 566 (5th Dist. February 10, 2014).*

Defendant’s stop was justified by the traffic offense of not signaling pulling away from the curb. State v. Rastbichler, 2014-Ohio-628, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 622 (2d Dist. February 21, 2014).*

Today is the 11th Anniversary of this blog with 10,400 searchable posts on this format,* about 3,500 on a prior format that has been abandoned (everything worth citing and before about March 1st is in the Fifth Edition).

That’s about 14,000 entries, and I have no idea how many cases I’ve read. There have also been 1,180,000 visitors in the last four years.

Today is also the 243d Anniversary of James Otis’s argument in the Writs of Assistance case which many founders believe led to the adoption of the Fourth Amendment. (See last year’s posting). I visited that courtroom in 2006 and wrote about it then.

_________________

* I’ve semi-explored changing formats, but searchability of the entire database is vitally important and couldn’t be assured without huge expense, so I’ve not changed it.

The officer had reason for stopping defendant based on a report from another officer about his alleged driving. When defendant passed six field sobriety tests, the totality of the circumstances, in the trial court’s view, did not support probable cause, and that finding is not against the weight of the evidence. State v. Bell, 2012 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 679 (August 31, 2012),* rev’d State v. Bell, 2014 Tenn. LEXIS 121 (February 20, 2014).

Defendant consented to a patdown but expressly said he didn’t consent to the officer “digging through my pockets,” which the officer did. There was no probable cause to believe that there was another weapon on him besides the knife he admitted having. Finding of drug paraphernalia was suppressed. State v. Tyler, 153 Idaho 623, 288 P.3d 840 (App. 2012).*

This case was briefed on the question of whether defendant could insulate his winter coat from a search incident by taking it off and throwing it in his car before his arrest. The court doesn’t have to decide that question because it finds that the automobile exception also applied. State v. Loman, 153 Idaho 573, 287 P.3d 210 (2012), Review denied by State v. Loman, 2012 Ida. LEXIS 201 (Idaho, Nov. 2, 2012).*

Search incident of the person of one arrested for civil nonsupport is reasonable under Robinson and Gant. Defendant was known to be a gang member, and a gang and drug multijurisdictional unit found him on a train, and there was a civil warrant for nonsupport. People v. Cregan, 2014 IL 113600, 2014 Ill. LEXIS 90 (February 21, 2014):

Continue reading →

Noting a circuit split, the Americans With Disability Act applies to arrests of the mentally ill. Plaintiff stated a claim. Remanded for further proceedings, and likely trial. Sheehan v. City & County of San Francisco, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 3321 (9th Cir. February 21, 2014). Summary by the Court:

Continue reading →

Ligon v. City of New York, 13‐3123‐cv, 13‐3088‐cv, 13‐3461‐cv (2d Cir. February 21, 2014):

Continue reading →

The Second Circuit on remand of Bailey v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 1031 (2013), finds admission of the illegally seized evidence harmless. United States v. Bailey, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 3320 (2d Cir. February 21, 2014):

Continue reading →

eff.org: Legal Community Disturbed About Recent Allegations of Spying on Privileged Communications by Nadia Kayyali:

Continue reading →

Politico: FAA risks losing drone war by Kevin Robillard:

Continue reading →

Indy Channel: IU professor, ACLU suing customs officials over alleged 4th Amendment violations at Indy airport by Drew Smith. A Greek professor flew to Indianapolis for a week on a professional trip. When the IU professor went with him to Customs to pick up a computer and things he’d shipped in advance of the trip, the IU professor was detained for hours with highly personal questions, and the questioners let it slip they’d read her emails.

Standard-Examiner: Utah bill would require search warrants for electronic data gathering by
Antone Clark:

Continue reading →

NYPost: Cops hit my car, then arrested me: suit by Josh Saul:

Continue reading →

Police received an anonymous call defendant was assaulting his girlfriend in his home, was armed, and likely had warrants for his arrest. Nothing was checked out ahead of time. When they got there and defendant answered the door, he looked “shocked” and backed away from the door. Police entered and saw nothing that indicated an assault had occurred. They fanned out to look for the woman, and found her hiding in a closet, saying she was “afraid of the police.” The defendant’s look and backing away supported exigency for the entry. Shadden v. State, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 1998 (Tex. App. – Amarillo February 20, 2014):

Continue reading →