Rutherford Institute Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Ensure that Lawful Gun Ownership Is Not a Trigger for ‘No-Knock’ Police Raids:

Continue reading →

The Atlantic: The War on Terror’s Jedi Mind Trick by Julian Sanchez:

Continue reading →

Defendant was fidgety and he was removed from the car and frisked. His wallet was removed. He was allowed back in the car but was still fidgety [there was stuff in the backseat that would have made it uncomfortable]. He consented to a second frisk. Yet, no weapon was ever found. The officer finally searched his wallet admitting that he was unconcerned about a weapon. The search of the wallet was unreasonable. State v. Dunlap, 2013-Ohio-5637, 2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 5898 (7th Dist. December 17, 2013).

Defense counsel was not ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress alleging third-party consent was coerced when defense counsel was never informed of any facts by the defendant to support that argument. The police reports said it was by consent, and the defendant and his witnesses didn’t contradict it. Kinsella v. State, 2013 ND 238, 2013 N.D. LEXIS 249 (December 19, 2013). [Note: Doesn’t this beg the question of defense counsel’s duty to inquire into whether the police reports were correct? After all, the writer of the police report isn’t about to put in there that he “let me search, but I might have coerced consent.” When debriefing the client, it is defense counsel’s duty to at least ask about the voluntariness of consent and statements and the legality of searches.]

I don’t even know how many on the prior version. This version started in February 2006. That’s only an average of 106 a month for the duration. For the last seven months, thanks to the NSA revelations, it averages 154 a month, a little over five a day.

eff.org: Landmark Decision Important Beyond NSA Phone Records Collection by Hanni Fakhoury:

Continue reading →

Jardines doesn’t prevent knock-and-talks going to the front door. Here, officers without a dog could smell marijuana. State v. Howard, 2013 Ida. App. LEXIS 92 (December 19, 2013):

Continue reading →

Defendant lived in New Jersey public housing with his mother, and she died. He was not a tenant on the lease. A couple of months later, the Housing Authority initiated eviction proceedings and served an eviction warrant by sliding it under the door, giving anybody inside four days to clear out or apply to a court for relief. After the four days, the Housing Authority entered and found drugs in an open shoebox on the bed. The entry was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and the N.J. Constitution, and he lost his reasonable expectation of privacy in the premises by not moving to protect it when the court ordered eviction notice was served, and he failed to counter it. State v. Hinton, 216 N.J. 211, 78 A.3d 553 (2013). Syllabus:

Continue reading →

In California, DNA is taken from all felony arrestees, and defendant’s was put into the state CODIS and he was linked to cold case burglaries and sex offenses. The seizure and use of his DNA was reasonable. Balancing the privacy interests in what part of the DNA is used and how against the governmental interests, this taking and use of DNA is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. People v. Lowe, 221 Cal. App. 4th 1276 (4th Dist. November 15, 2013), published December 4, 2013:

Continue reading →

The arrest was within the officer’s jurisdiction, but a breathalyzer administered outside of the officer’s jurisdiction was not a Fourth Amendment violation. Pickering v. State, 2012 Ark. 280, 412 S.W.3d 143 (2012).*

Defendant apparently was snitched off to the police by his own passenger that he was wanted on a warrant. The officer ran the defendant’s name and found the warrant. That was a sufficient basis for a stop. The CI’s reliability, if it’s even an issue, was established by finding the warrant or was mooted by the warrant. United States v. Beals, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84919 (E.D. Cal. June 19, 2012).*

On de novo review, the officer’s version is more credible, even though he admitted he was in the gang unit conducting a traffic stop and “was not well-versed in the traffic code.” United States v. Shipp, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85924 (E.D. Wis. June 21, 2012).*

Defendant was stopped in a high crime area on a bicycle at night with no light. He was nervous and couldn’t account for his possession of the backpack he had. It was reasonable then to separate him from the backpack for safety reasons when the officers patted him down. The officers then had plain smell of marijuana from the backpack for its search. State v. Baggett, 664 Ariz. Adv. Rep.17, 306 P.3d 81 (2013).

Officers had a search warrant for a cell phone that was alleged to have images of child pornography on them. Defendant was questioned but not in custody when he admitted to having images of child pornography on his cell phone. United States v. Conder, 529 Fed. Appx. 618 (6th Cir. 2013).*

Defendant’s stop for potential traffic violations was without reasonable suspicion, and nothing specific can be identified. Suppressed. State v. Stanley, 2013 Iowa App. LEXIS 741 (July 10, 2013).*

A camper parked on commercial property, “not in a place regularly used for residential purposes,” was subject to the automobile exception although it was parked, no vehicle was attached, and electric cords ran to it. State v. Otto, 2013 ND 239, 2013 N.D. LEXIS 242 (December 19, 2013):

Continue reading →

Roadblock in a “violent” area sustained where it was “for the purpose of checking driver’s license, insurance, seat belts, make sure there were no drunk drivers, that kind of thing.” It was apparently set up just to have a police presence in the area. Defendant was stopped, and one thing led to another and drugs were found. The roadblock passed constitutional muster for planning and operation. Woolen v. State, 2013 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 111 (December 20, 2013):

Continue reading →

While New Jersey law provides that a search warrant can be issued on the request of another state for a crime in that other state, the remedy of suppression lies in the other state, not New Jersey. They also can’t get to it by seeking return of property either. In re Search Warrants of VS2 Worldwide Communs., L.L.C., 2013 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2992 (December 20, 2013) (unpublished; but it shouldn’t be).

Defendant was followed by the police because a headlight was out, and then he made what the officer considered an evasive move by quickly turning into a driveway. The officers pulled in behind and got out to talk to the occupants, one on each side. The trial court’s finding of consent to search the car is supported by the evidence. State v. Spivey, 2013-Ohio-5581, 2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 5840 (8th Dist. December 19, 2013).*

Somebody running from car when it was stopped + furtive movement = reasonable suspicion. United States v. Harris, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179111 (S.D. N.Y. December 20, 2013).*

Callers to a crime tip line ID’ed multiple suspects as a bank robber, but one said he’d known defendant for 10 years and he was sure it was him. Omitting the others was not material for Franks purposes. United States v. Richardson, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178751 (W.D. Okla. December 20, 2013):

Continue reading →

Tobacco sales are highly regulated under Burger. By undertaking to sell tobacco products, the business is subject to regulatory searches over whether the cigarettes are taxed. United States v. Hamad, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178720 (N.D. Ill. December 20, 2013):

Continue reading →

MSNBC: How Sotomayor undermined Obama’s NSA by Adam Serwer

Continue reading →

CNET: Why more people are training their cell phones on police by Chris Matyszczyk:

A police officer tries to stop a man washing his car in his own driveway. If it wasn’t filmed on a smartphone, few would believe it.

Grits for Breakfast: Thinking through state-level regulation of automatic license plate readers, http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2013/12/thinking-through-state-level-regulation.html?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzEmail&utm_content=79553&utm_campaign=0:

Continue reading →