Probation staff and the government failed to prove that the place searched under a probation search condition was defendant’s place. He was permitted to stay with relatives on occasion but those were not his residences. The search is suppressed. United States v. Brewer, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132179 (E.D.Mich. July 31, 2023).
The dog arrived soon enough into the stop that it wasn’t delayed any. It was reasonable. State v. Heath, 2023-Ohio-2647, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 2609 (11th Dist. July 31, 2023).*
Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy from being recorded by an IRS agent he invited into his office. Ramseur v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132146 (N.D. Tex. June 21, 2023).*
Defendant’s Franks challenge fails for lack of the affiant’s intent to mislead and lack of materiality. As to two places searched, he doesn’t have standing either. United States v. Bolling, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132105 (S.D.W.Va. July 31, 2023).*
The defendant here sought discovery of the alleged victim’s GPS information from his car in an effort to prove someone else was involved in the crime. The court concludes that this is private action (although enforced by court) and the probable cause standard isn’t required. Instead, “substantial probability” is required. The court has to balance the rights of the victim under the Victim’s Bill of Rights with the defense right to put on a defense. Draper v. Gentry, 2023 Ariz. LEXIS 161 (July 31, 2023):
In a CPS-type case, there was a search warrant for two cell phones with alleged child pornography on them, and officers were going to execute them outside a hearing in the courthouse. Watching on surveillance video, officers saw the phones’ owners attorneys handling the phones and put them in briefcases. The lawyers were ultimately arrested for obstruction, but they were found not guilty. They sued for false arrest, but the officers get qualified immunity for the alleged false arrest. Garcia v. Casey, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19533 (11th Cir. July 28, 2023).
Defendant’s motion to suppress was properly denied for his lack of standing in the place searched. “Defendant’s motion papers did not contain sworn allegations that defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place searched, and thus he failed to demonstrate that he had standing to challenge the search warrant and the ensuing search of the residence.” People v. Chavis, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4094 (4th Dept. July 29, 2023).* Same result: People v. Fernandez, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4050 (4th Dept. July 29, 2023).*
Defendant’s tossing a bag of drugs under his car during a traffic stop was not the product of a prolonged stop. State v. Abdullahi, 2023 ME 41 (July 27, 2023).*
Under Mimms, the occupants can be ordered out of the car during a stop. The fact the trial judge disagreed with the three rationales offered for it by the officer doesn’t matter. State v. Li, 2023 R.I. LEXIS 90 (July 27, 2023).
There was probable cause for the search warrant here, and the trial court erred in suppressing. People v. Conway, 2023 NY Slip Op 04043, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3996 (4th Dept. July 29, 2023).*
The search warrant here was issued on probable cause and was particular. People v. Moore, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4099 (4th Dept. July 29, 2023).*
During the traffic stop, the officer asked if defendant had anything on him, and he said he was armed. The officer was permitted to lift defendant’s shirt to look for it. United States v. Williams, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130933 (E.D. Tenn. July 28, 2023).*
The officer here was a Bureau of Indian Affairs highway officer with four states in his purview. He admittedly stops a lot of motorists, and he also does drug interdiction. He stopped defendant for following too close, engaged in conversation, and called for a drug dog which arrived before the stop was over. The dog sniff was reasonable because the stop was not extended. United States v. Williams, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130902 (N.D. Iowa June 8, 2023),* adopted, Jul 26, 20232023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128955 (N.D. Iowa July 26, 2023)*:
The search warrant didn’t specify the crime under investigation and that was a problem for particularity. That could have been cured by the affidavit being attached to the warrant at execution but it wasn’t. It was referred to in the warrant. It surfaced 14 days later in discovery. Nevertheless, the good faith exception is found to apply. The proof is in the pudding: where did they actually search? United States v. Gilbert, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130750 (D. Conn. July 28, 2023):
Posted inPole cameras|Comments Off on SDT-U: Could San Diego Police Department’s smart streetlights program infringe upon privacy rights? [as in 500 pole cameras]
Officers’ apparent delays in processing paperwork on an arrest which resulted in plaintiff spending an extra two days in jail without any kind of probable cause finding violated clearly established law. Here, the prosecutor wouldn’t act without their paperwork. “It was therefore clearly established at the time of Brown’s arrest that her arresting officers had a duty to take her before a magistrate for a probable cause hearing. The MSP Defendants made no efforts to do so, and they are not entitled to qualified immunity on Brown’s Riverside claim.” Brown v. Knapp, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19523 (6th Cir. July 28, 2023). See Bloomberg Law: Michigan Police Must Face Suit for Arrest Without Cause Hearing.
Defendant’s traffic stop was justified by seeing him smoking a blunt while driving, and that led to a search of the vehicle. United States v. Pinuela, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130588 (M.D. Fla. July 27, 2023).*
Yes, there were minor inaccuracies in the affidavit for warrant, but they were not material to the finding of probable cause. Also, the warrant was executed in good faith. United States v. Stanford, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19477 (3d Cir. July 28, 2023).*
Exceptions to the warrant requirement do not appear to be affirmative defenses required to be pled in a § 1983 case under F.R.C.P. 8(c) waived by not pleading in first response. Szappan v. Meder, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19485 (6th Cir. July 26, 2023):
Failure to comply with the knock and announce requirement could result in exclusion under state law. Here, however, the trial court’s findings of fact justified dispensing with the knock-and-announce requirement. Officers heard defendant acknowledge their presence, and then they entered with guns drawn. Commonwealth v. Goodis, 2023 PA Super 136, 2023 Pa. Super. LEXIS 340 (July 28, 2023).
The state had defendant’s bank records by search warrant and subpoena. It said it wouldn’t use the warrant-seized records and agreed to a motion to suppress. That didn’t preclude using the subpoenaed records. People v Decker, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3991 (3d Dept. July 27, 2023).*
The stop was with reasonable suspicion that defendant’s tag light was out. When the DL was handed over, he took off driving 120 mph. When he stopped, he bailed from the car carrying his backpack. That gave probable cause there was contraband in it. “The defendant argues in his motion that even with this reasonable, articulable suspicion, the officers used the traffic violation as a pretext to stop him to investigate for drug possession. At the hearing, the defendant’s counsel suggested that Officer Cullen and Agent Dunn conducted a drug interdiction operation and were not truly interested in investigating traffic violations.” United States v. Burney, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130095 (S.D. W.Va. July 27, 2023).*
Defendant got off a Greyhound bus in Omaha during a driver change. The officers just barely had reasonable suspicion to detain defendant, and pulling his blanket off amounted to a search. That enabled the officer to see he had a bulge in his clothing that was 1500g of meth. Suppressed. United States v. Jimenez, 22-2670 (8th Cir. July 28, 2023).
Nexus was shown for a cell phone ping. “Because the Fourth Amendment does not limit the Government to seizing only instrumentalities of crime, a cell phone’s nexus to criminal activity need not arise solely as an instrument that facilitates the charged crime.” United States v. Rashwan, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130348 (E.D. Pa. July 27, 2023).*
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s probation search that he was misusing the internet, and the child porn found would not be excluded. Commonwealth v. Kuhlman, 2023 PA Super 133, 2023 Pa. Super. LEXIS 330 (July 27, 2023).*
There was probable cause for the search warrant and the good faith exception applies in any event. United States v. Johnson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130082 (W.D. Va. July 27, 2023).*
The search exceeding the scope of a warrant justified suppression: “But here, the benefit of suppression is neither marginal nor nonexistent. The agents exceeded the scope of authority conferred by the warrant when they either ignored or disregarded the risk that they had entered a multi-family residence. In ignoring that risk, the search assumed ‘the character of the wide-ranging exploratory searches the Framers intended to prohibit.’ Suppressing the physical evidence and statements obtained under these circumstances advances the privacy interests that are the foundation of the Fourth Amendment. It reinforces the sanctity of one’s residence and deters reckless police conduct in the execution of search warrants.” United States v. Andrews, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19397 (3d Cir. July 27, 2023).
The affidavit for the warrant was prepared under a “time crunch” because it was anticipatory and the package was coming. Some details were omitted, and some “bolstering the existence of probable cause” and “summarized others.” “The magistrate judge, after hearing testimony from Officer Davis, concluded that his conduct in drafting the affidavit amounted to negligence. But to prevail here, Johnson ‘must show more than negligence or an innocent mistake.’ … And we agree with the district court that Officer Davis did not act recklessly in his efforts to obtain a search warrant, despite the time pressure. The record does not indicate that Officer Davis entertained serious doubts about, or had obvious reasons to question, the accuracy of his statements. Therefore, Johnson is not entitled to suppression under Franks.” United States v. Johnson, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19217 (8th Cir. July 27, 2023).*
An alleged violation of department policy on police chases doesn’t equal a Fourth Amendment violation. United States v. Moore, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130238 (W.D. Tenn. July 27, 2023).
Speeding and erratic driving justified the stop, and alcohol was seen in plain view, and that led to seeing a gun, and that led to an automobile exception search. United States v. Mitchell, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130074 (E.D. Va. July 26, 2023).*
Defendant doesn’t get discovery of the identity of the CIs that led to the search warrant because they aren’t material to any fact issue for trial. United States v. Cole, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128751 (D.Minn. July 26, 2023).*
Defendant’s apparent Franks claim fails because the suppression hearing showed no dispute of facts on the issuance of the warrant. The officer’s version came from his investigation. State v. Calo-Jimenez, 2023-Ohio-2562 (1st Dist. July 26, 2023).*
Information on defendant’s cell phone linking him and Trafficker A also linked his home to the transactions and that showed nexus. United States v. Johnson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130082 (W.D. Va. July 27, 2023).*
The information about defendant’s drug operation in the affidavit wasn’t stale, and it showed an ongoing operation. Thus, it wasn’t stale. United States v. Simmons, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130127 (M.D.Ala. June 23, 2023), adopted 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128959 (M.D.Ala. July 26, 2023).*
There was probable cause for the search warrant for defendant’s room at a center for those with mental health problems. People v. West, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3956 (2d Dist. July 26, 2023).*
Not every push or shove by an officer is excessive. Here, plaintiff’s actions were potentially threatening to the officers and he was pushed back down to subdue him. It was not objectively unreasonable. Blake v. Orange Cnty. Sheriff’s Office, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19104 (11th Cir. July 26, 2023).*
“Here, the Court finds that Omegle and TextNow’s preservation of evidence in response to the Government’s request under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(f)—a provision of the Stored Communications Act—did not violate the Fourth Amendment for two reasons. First, because the preservation was not a seizure. Second, because Omegle and TextNow were not acting as government agents.” United States v. King, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129751 (D.Nev. July 17, 2023).
Traffic offenses, aside from a cracked windshield, justified the stop. “[W]hile Wilson was looking for various documents, Green noticed items in the glove compartment indicative of drug use. This, combined with his observations about Wilson and Hart’s demeanor, was enough to arouse Green’s suspicion that further criminal activity was afoot.” Thus, the stop was reasonably extended. United States v. Hart, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128661 (D. Idaho July 24, 2023).*
Without explaining the facts, the district court’s findings the use of force was reasonable is affirmed. Skeen v. Sparks, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19099 (4th Cir. July 26, 2023).*
“Contrary to defendant’s contention, the CI’s basis of knowledge was not undermined by the fact that the CI did not actually enter the apartment during the controlled buys …. A sufficient nexus to the apartment was established by the continuous surveillance of defendant as he left the apartment on each occasion, traveled directly to meet the CI, and sold to the CI what was later confirmed to be crack cocaine.” People v. Merritt, 2023 NY Slip Op 03954, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3986 (3d Dept. July 27, 2023).
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the stop and search of his car where the partial license plate and the car matched one in a shooting. It was valid. Lurry v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128385 (W.D.N.C. July 25, 2023).*
“The facts and circumstances in this case support the conclusion that Mayfield’s investigation into other criminal activity did not measurably extend the duration of the stop.” Enriquez v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 5438 (Tex. App. – Austin July 25, 2023).*
“We determine that even if defense counsel had filed a motion to suppress the results of the pat-down search, such a motion would have been unsuccessful.” Mubarak v. State, 2023 Iowa App. LEXIS 581 (July 25, 2023).*
A dog alert on a car was probable cause for a search of it and containers, here a backpack. State v. Kumuhone, 2023-Ohio-2586, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 2554 (8th Dist. July 27, 2023).
“The contemporaneous tip, the visual details that Jakobsohn confirmed, the high-crime area, and Wright’s evasive response to police presence were enough to give an officer articulable suspicion that crime was occurring (or was about to occur). To conclude otherwise would raise the bar of reasonable suspicion and hamper law enforcement from engaging in essential investigatory actions.” United States v. Wright, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19008 (5th Cir. July 25, 2023).*
Defendant’s Colombian wiretap did not shock the judicial conscience. It was a foreign search. United States v. Milligan, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128157 (E.D. Mich. July 25, 2023).*
The officer’s use of his overhead lights for safety during a welfare check of a car off the highway was not a show of force for a detention. State v. Toure, 2023-Ohio-2559 (5th Dist. July 25, 2023).*
Defendant was an escapee from a BOP halfway house, and he had no reasonable expectation of privacy where he was found. Also, he was subject to a search condition at the halfway house, and that’s not avoided by escape. United States v. Harrison, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129582 (N.D. N.Y. July 20, 2023).
A fictitious license plate is reasonable suspicion to believe the car is stolen. State v. Kinney, 2023-Ohio-2549 (7th Dist. July 13, 2023).*
Defendant was stopped walking along I-465 and said his car ran out of gas. The officer saw a gun in his waistband, and he was a felon. The stop was reasonable. Hutson v. State, 2023 Ind. App. LEXIS 216 (July 26, 2023).*
“The PPD officers conducted the inventory search pursuant to standardized procedures and Defendant has not made a showing that the government acted in bad faith. As discussed supra, the search served a legitimate, community caretaking function and was not therefore conducted ‘for the sole purpose of investigation.’” United States v. Victor, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127876 (S.D. N.Y. July 25, 2023).*
Reason: A SWAT Team Destroyed an Innocent Man’s Shop. Then the City Left Him With the Bill. by Billy Binion (“Pena didn’t fault the city for attempting to subdue an allegedly dangerous person. But he objected to what came next: The government refused his requests for compensation, strapping him with expenses that exceed $60,000 and a situation that has cost him tens of thousands of dollars in revenue, as he has been resigned to working at a much-reduced capacity out of his garage, according to a lawsuit he filed this month in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.”)
Posted inWarrant execution|Comments Off on Reason: A SWAT Team Destroyed an Innocent Man’s Shop. Then the City Left Him With the Bill.
Suppression of evidence is not the remedy for an equal protection violation, even if it were valid, which it’s not. United States v. Christie, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129172 (E.D. Tenn. July 26, 2023).
A fictitious license plate is reasonable suspicion to believe the car is stolen. State v. Kinney, 2023-Ohio-2549 (7th Dist. July 13, 2023).*
Defendant was stopped walking along I-465 and said his car ran out of gas. The officer saw a gun in his waistband, and he was a felon. The stop was reasonable. Hutson v. State, 2023 Ind. App. LEXIS 216 (July 26, 2023).*
“The PPD officers conducted the inventory search pursuant to standardized procedures and Defendant has not made a showing that the government acted in bad faith. As discussed supra, the search served a legitimate, community caretaking function and was not therefore conducted ‘for the sole purpose of investigation.’” United States v. Victor, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127876 (S.D. N.Y. July 25, 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.
