Defendant entered into a beneficial plea agreement and pled to a superseding information and was sentenced. Later, the passenger in his car filed a motion to suppress and prevailed. Still, this was not ineffective assistance of his counsel. “Aside from testimony and other information that would not come to light until after Mr. Neal pleaded guilty, the decision to forego a motion to suppress was strategic and not an unintelligent approach to a smart defense. Counsel’s affidavit affirms that he discussed at length with Mr. Neal a motion to quash arrest and motion to suppress evidence. Mr. Neal does not contest this.” Neal v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147147 (N.D. Ind. Aug. 21, 2023).
Defendant’s DNA was taken by limited consent, and developing a DNA profile from it would have violated the scope of consent. “Still, the superior court erred by suppressing Mitcham’s DNA profile because (1) probable cause supported his arrest even without the impermissible DNA match that allowed the State to obtain a buccal swab and develop a DNA profile; and (2) once Mitcham pled guilty to other felony charges, the profile was properly in the State’s possession. Thus, we reverse the suppression order and remand for further proceedings.” State v. Mitcham, 2023 Ariz. App. LEXIS 360 (Aug. 22, 2023).*
There was independent probable cause under the automobile exception to search defendant’s vehicle on the premises where a warrant was being executed. United States v. Joins, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22074 (11th Cir. Aug. 22, 2023).*
“But Garcia has a high hurdle to combat a probable-cause determination because G.C., the putative victim, identified him as responsible. … An officer need not even believe that a witness is reliable to determine that her statement supports probable cause for an arrest because the assessment of credibility rests with courts, not officers.” Garcia v. Posewitz, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21986 (7th Cir. Aug. 22, 2023).
“There was probable cause to search the Jeep even without this statement” in the affidavit. United States v. Brooms, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146420 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 1, 2023).*
A landlord and the FBI violated no Fourth Amendment right to complain that the landlord rented an apartment to the FBI to harass him. Aboussa v. Keystone Mgmt. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146718 (D.N.H. June 27, 2023).*
Appellant’s Franks challenge fails because the evidence supports the district court’s conclusion. United States v. McKnight, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22028 (9th Cir. Aug. 22, 2023).*
The government’s “pre-search” of a shared folder on defendant’s computer available through eMule was not subject to a reasonable expectation of privacy and was reasonable. United States v. Johnson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146664 (D. Ariz. Aug. 21, 2023), adopting 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149256 (D. Ariz. July 11, 2023).
Officers questioning plaintiff on his front porch violated well-established law on curtilage, so there is no qualified immunity. Brizuela v. City of Sparks, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21893 (9th Cir. Aug. 21, 2023).*
“Mascorro does not specifically identify evidence that was used in violation of his Fourth Amendment protections.” Therefore, his ineffective assistance of counsel claim fails. Mascorro v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146005 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 21, 2023).*
“Vailes’s argument that the warrant fails for lack of probable cause that he was engaged in the separate crime of sex trafficking is supported by only a hypertechnical read of the search warrant that is not justified here.” United States v. Vailes, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146091 (D. Nev. Aug. 21, 2023).*
“Based upon all of the above, the roughly 2 minutes and 23 seconds that Sergeant Perrin spent trying to determine why the passenger had given his false information was not an unreasonable extension of the duration of stop.” United States v. Hoover, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145887 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 21, 2023).*
“The officer who conducted the traffic stop, Nebraska State Patrol Trooper Austin Donner, worked diligently throughout the traffic stop, completing all the tasks associated with the traffic stop and issuing warning ticket within 12 minutes. (Ex. 2). Thereafter, Defendant agreed to remain in the patrol vehicle and answer additional questions posed by the officer. (Ex. 2, 13:30-13:37). Defendant was not unreasonably detained in violation of the Fourth Amendment.” Then he consented. United States v. Rodriguez-Rios, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145951 (D. Neb. Aug. 18, 2023).*
“The court concludes that Rugg’s inquiries about the BMW and Defendants’ travel plans, and his subsequent detention of Defendants until completion of the dog sniff, were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Otero was unable to produce a driver’s license (and admitted he did not have one) or proof that the car was insured. It was reasonable under the circumstances for Rugg to conduct inquiries and run checks relating to the vehicle and to Otero’s status until he could confirm whether Otero was in lawful possession of the vehicle and whether anyone present could lawfully operate it. Rugg’s initial questions to Otero were either related to the mission of the stop or did not measurably extend the duration of the stop.” United States v. Otero, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145751 (D. Kan. Aug. 18, 2023).*
Posted inConsent, Reasonable suspicion|Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Passenger’s false info justified extending stop
A “red screen” on the police car’s computer screen meant a serious warning about defendant’s LPN, and that justified the stop. State v. Cooper, 2023-Ohio-2897, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 2881 (5th Dist. Aug. 18, 2023).*
Blocking both ends of an alley was a seizure of defendant’s car. It was with reasonable suspicion. United States v. Clark, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145613 (E.D. Va. Aug. 18, 2023).*
Defendant can’t show that his curtilage argument would have won; therefore, defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not pursuing it. Reese v. State, 2023 Ga. LEXIS 173 (Aug. 21, 2023).*
NYTimes: The Revealing Case of a Kansas Judge and a Search Warrant by Gregory P. Magarian (“A government raid on a newspaper’s office and its publisher’s home, with police seizing reporters’ computers and phones, sounds like a lurid tale from Vladimir Putin’s Russia. This may have been an extreme case, but the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker documents dozens of government (as well as private) offenses against American journalists every year — not just searches and seizures but also arrests, physical assaults by the police, prior restraints, intimidation and improper denials of access to locations and information. All of this can add up to big legal fees for newspapers struggling to survive.”)
Posted inWarrant execution|Comments Off on NYTimes: The Revealing Case of a Kansas Judge and a Search Warrant
“Thus, we conclude law enforcement was acting outside the scope of the community caretaking function when opening the semi door and stepping onto the running boards in an attempt to gather information without first attempting to get a response from outside of the vehicle. From this unlawful intrusion into Petersen’s vehicle, the officers were able to obtain information they would not otherwise have been able to obtain, such as the odor of alcohol emanating from Petersen and his bloodshot watery eyes. This warrantless trespass was an unreasonable search in violation of Petersen’s constitutional rights.” Under prong two of the inevitable discovery doctrine, the State must prove that the evidence would have been found without the unlawful activity and must show how the discovery of the evidence would have occurred. State v. Petersen, 2023 ND 155, 2023 N.D. LEXIS 157 (Aug. 17, 2023).
The affidavit for warrant was not materially false in stating that all the officers could smell marijuana on the premises during a protective sweep. Maybe not all but most actually did, so it’s not materially false. United States v. Bailey, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145302 (E.D. Tenn. July 14, 2023).*
“Plaintiffs do not point to, and this Court is not aware of, any Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit case law holding that an officer may not climb over a locked gate to conduct a knock and talk. Nor have a consensus of other circuits held the same.” Nidiffer v. Lovato, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145599 (D.N.M. Aug. 18, 2023).*
“Daniel has not demonstrated that the omission of the initial car search’s fruitlessness from the affidavit amounted to a deliberate falsehood or showed reckless disregard for the truth.” United States v. Daniel, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21751 (6th Cir. Aug. 16, 2023).*
“In sum, we conclude that Officer DelCore used objectively reasonable force when he initiated arrest procedures by grabbing Mr. Anderson’s wrist and twisting his arm behind his back. Considering the totality of the circumstances, Officer DelCore used a minor degree of force that was appropriately tailored to the circumstances. Even though Mr. Andersen did not pose a threat to the officers, he was suspected of a serious crime. And most importantly, Officer DelCore had a lawful basis to demand that Mr. Andersen turn over the cell phone to prevent the destruction of evidence and was entitled to use some force when he refused to comply. Therefore, no constitutional violation occurred at that point of the arrest.” Andersen v. Delcore, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21674 (10th Cir. Aug. 18, 2023).*
One bedroom in defendant’s house was rented out, and he argued that the warrant was void. It didn’t have standing in that room. United States v. Wiggins, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145009 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 18, 2023).*
“The record establishes that the doors to Mr. Wallin’s room were ‘completely wide open’ and the officers entered without force to execute a valid arrest warrant. The knock-and-announce requirement in section 901.19(1) did not apply based on the statute’s plain language, and as we held in Brown, the officers ‘did not need to stop and wait for permission to enter peaceably,’ 564 So. 2d at 136. We therefore reverse the order suppressing the evidence found in Mr. Wallin’s motel room and remand for further proceedings.” State v. Wallin, 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 5822 (Fla. 2d DCA Aug. 18, 2023).
California S.Ct. denied review of applying the good faith exception to an alleged statutory violation of the state privacy statute for a geofence warrant. Two justices dissented thinking the issue important enough to decide. People v. Meza, 2023 Cal. LEXIS 4522 (Aug. 16, 2023).* Prior opinion posted here.
“In sum, we agree with the district court that (1) the stop was based on particularized, not generic, information; (2) minor conflicts in eyewitness accounts do not warrant a different finding; and (3) temporal and geographic proximity support a finding of reasonable suspicion.” United States v. Alkheqani, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21620 (5th Cir. Aug. 17, 2023).*
The passenger’s admitted lie about his age was reasonable suspicion to continue the stop. He wasn’t forthcoming in giving his age and first lied about it. It was permissible to ask the passenger about his identifiers. State v. Vasquez-Salas, 2023 N.M. LEXIS 188 (Aug. 14, 2023).
Consent is always a possible exception to Rodriguez. United States v. Gaines, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142858 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 15, 2023).
The government offered aerial video and this was not subject to a Franks challenge, although defendant got a mid-trial suppression hearing. United States v. Lee, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144652 (D.Alaska Aug. 17, 2023).*
There was no reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop as a potential suspect in a shooting incident. The suspected shooter was in a white Jeep, and he was in a white Corolla, “a markedly different” type of vehicle. Also, it was five hours later in the opposite direction from the shooting. People of the V.I. v. Francis, 2023 VI SUPER 48U, 2023 V.I. LEXIS 34 (Aug. 14, 2023).*
Officers responding to a call about a shot fired from a window found a man answering the door matching the 911 description. A protective sweep was thus permissible. Defendant also consented to the entry. United States v. Williams, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21358 (8th Cir. Aug. 16, 2023).
The motion to suppress was previously denied on the good faith exception, although there was no probable cause for the warrant. Defendant filed a motion to reopen that the police cold case investigation was really a sham for the warrant. It was a mere lack of evidence, not an intent to deceive under Franks. United States v. Karun, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142975 (D. Me. Aug. 16, 2023).*
Defendant’s laptop was subjected to a private search by a person with apparent authority under the Texas exclusionary rule statute. Therefore, it was admissible. Runyon v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 6245 (Tex. App. – Beaumont Aug 16, 2023).*
The indictment was dismissed, and defendant moves for return of his cell phone. The government resists but must show cause why it should not be granted. United States v. Jones, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144646 (D.Kan. Aug. 17, 2023).*
Department of Data, Washington Post: The Fourth Amendment (254,471) is the fourth most cited constitutional amendment in judicial opinions after the Fourteenth (501,271), Fifth (306,821), and Sixth (288,832) Amendments per LexisNexis. Judges have cited the Fourteenth Amendment half a million times — more than all but two federal statutes.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on WaPo: 4A fourth most cited amendment
Defendant challenges the tribal search warrant as lacking probable cause and being vindictively obtained, the latter of which does not exist under Rule 41. He fails to include the warrant papers so the court can’t rule. United States v. Floyd, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142923 (D.S.D. July 21, 2023), adopted, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142925 (D.S.D. Aug. 14, 2023).
Defendant’s motion to suppress the warrant can’t be considered on appeal because the warrant papers are not in the record. Alternatively, the presumption of regularity of the warrant satisfies the state’s burden. State v. Thompkins, 2023-Ohio-2871, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 2839 (5th Dist. Aug. 16, 2023).
The trial court’s finding of consent without intimidation or coercion is supported by the record and affirmed. Luna-Galacia v. State, 2023 Ga. App. LEXIS 396 (Aug. 16, 2023).*
With confusing instructions in English and Spanish, decedent was trying to comply with directives from the officers and he did not pose and immediate threat when he was shot. Aleman v. City of Charlotte, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21398 (4th Cir. Aug. 16, 2023).*
A third-party company’s records aren’t as detailed as electronic records (as in Carpenter), and they are not subject to the same standards for a warrant. State v. Hargrove, 327 Ore. App. 437 (Aug. 16, 2023) (at least not yet and not without a really developed record):
“The Instagram Motion [to suppress] will be granted in part. Although the probable cause to search Rivers’ Instagram account was weak, the Leon good faith exception applies and the evidence will therefore not be suppressed on the basis of a lack of probable cause. However, as discussed in more detail below, the Government did not reasonably conduct its March and June 2023 reviews of the massive amount of data that was entrusted to it and the evidence obtained from those reviews will be suppressed. The Court will hear additional argument and evidence with respect to data reviewed prior to March 2023 to determine whether any evidence obtained through such earlier reviews should be admitted at trial.” United States v. Cawthorn, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142471 (D.Md. July 14, 2023).
Decedent’s coming at officers from 13′ with a large knife drawn objectively justified deadly force. Quinones v. City of Edina, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21360 (8th Cir. Aug. 16, 2023).*
Once DNA is taken, a separate warrant isn’t required for its testing and further comparison. People v. Gonzalez-Mendoza, 2023 NY Slip Op 32771(U), 2023 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4084 (Putnam Co. July 7, 2023).*
Plaintiff raised questions of fact and law as to the officer’s authority to arrest him in his front yard on the curtilage. Summary judgment denied on the merits, but remanded for further qualified immunity analysis. Sauceda v. City of San Benito, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21295 (5th Cir. Aug. 15, 2023).*
On removal, plaintiff amended his complaint, and the Fourth Amendment claim went away. The court declines supplemental jurisdiction and remands. Harris v. City of San Diego, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141959 (S.D.Cal. Aug. 14, 2023).*
Plaintiff’s being subjected to a contraband search in prison was not a proper basis for a Bivens claim. Williams v. Verna, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21214 (9th Cir. Aug. 15, 2023).*
Defendants do not get qualified immunity for their overbroad search of records because the law was clearly established. Hoeltzel v. Pillsbury, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 21218 (6th Cir. Aug. 15, 2023).*
The state’s statutory failure to allow defendant to contact a lawyer before a BAC test doesn’t require suppression of the BAC test. Dunbar v. Dir. of Revenue, 2023 Mo. App. LEXIS 582 (Aug. 15, 2023).
“Movant provides no facts or evidence to show a reasonable probability that even if the challenged search was unlawful, the Court would have excluded the evidence from the search for sentencing purposes. He therefore cannot demonstrate that counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress evidence or to otherwise challenge the search of his vehicle. Movant has failed to show Strickland prejudice, and his claims should be denied.” Paris v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142562 (N.D.Tex. July 10, 2023).*
Defendant’s arrest and search was completely unjustified. The trial court erred in not suppressing and dismissing the case. State v. Price, 2023 MT 154, 2023 Mont. LEXIS 810 (Aug. 15, 2023).*
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." —Me
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." –Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.” —Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced." —Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." —Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today." — Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property." —Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment." —United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth." —Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable." —Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected." —Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” —United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.” —United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." —Mick Jagger & Keith Richards, Let it Bleed (album, 1969)
"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]
“Children grow up thinking the adult world is ordered, rational, fit for purpose. It’s crap. Becoming a man is realising that it’s all rotten. Realising how to celebrate that rottenness, that’s freedom.” – John le Carré, The Night Manager (1993), line by Richard Roper
"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." —Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)
The book was dedicated in the first (1982) and sixth (2025) editions to Justin William Hall (1975-2025). He was three when this project started in 1978.
