Defendant’s vehicle was stopped and ultimately removed to another location for a dog sniff to get probable cause for a search warrant for the car. The removal was unreasonable and justified under the Fourth Amendment. The dog sniff was several hours later. The warrant was tainted by these actions. “Based on the foregoing, this case is a perfect example as to why the exclusionary rule was created and therefore should be applied to the evidence seized from the defendant’s Cadillac vehicle on June 21, 2019.” United States v. Washington, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235490 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 28, 2022).
Defendant filed a motion to suppress which had already been denied. He sought additional discovery of those who might have been involved in the searches. Denied. Another motion to suppress wouldn’t be timely. United States v. Garg, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6086 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 12, 2023).*
2254 petitioner had his “full and fair” opportunity to litigate his motion to suppress and lost on the merits. Stone bars relief. Boyington v. Dixon, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235465 (N.D. Fla. Dec. 8, 2022).*
Posted inDog sniff, Issue preclusion|Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Moving car without PC for later dog sniff hours later tainted SW based on dog alert
Depending on how one counted the time between the seizure of the cell phone and the search warrant, it was either 3 or 11 days, and either is reasonable. United States v. Deakins, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6661 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 13, 2023).*
Failure to file a suppression motion was waiver of the claims. United States v. Miller, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 641 (11th Cir. Jan. 11, 2023).*
“Considering ‘both the content of the information possessed by police and its degree of reliability,’ I find that the stop was reasonable. Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393, 134 S. Ct. 1683, 1685, 188 L. Ed. 2d 680, (2014). ‘[S]ociety’s interest in effective crime prevention and detection, as well as in officer and public safety while pursuing criminal investigations, can make it constitutionally reasonable in appropriate circumstances and in an appropriate manner both temporarily to detain a person and to pat him down for weapons, even though there is no probable cause to make an arrest.’ … United States v. Ayala, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5959 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 12, 2023).*
Officers had information from the state DL and LPN database that defendant’s car had no insurance. That justified the stop even if it turned out to be erroneous. United States v. Conley, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 856 (6th Cir. Jan. 12, 2023).
Two officers were involved in the stop and one saw a gun on the back floorboard of the vehicle within 30 seconds. They acted separate and that did not extend the stop. United States v. Beck, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4609 (M.D. Ga. Jan. 10, 2023).*
There was probable cause for the warrant for defendant’s house on his taking possession of a drug package and taking it home. No observations from the curtilage made it into the warrant application. Eckert v. State, 2023 Alas. App. LEXIS 5 (Jan. 11, 2023) (memorandum).*
Defendant’s motion to suppress the search of Device A is premature since the product of the search isn’t yet known. Also, his motion to suppress the search of Device B is denied for lack of standing. It isn’t his. United States v. Sterling, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6852 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 13, 2023).
Defendant contended that his presence at the scene of the execution of the search warrant amounted to custody for Miranda purposes. He tried to show that the officers manipulated the situation to avoid “custody.” The court disagrees. United States v. Mamadjonov, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6479 (D. Conn. Jan. 13, 2023).*
An LPN check revealed the registered owner had an expired DL, and the driver’s age appeared roughly the same as the owner. That supported the stop. United States v. Thayer, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6657 (S.D. W. Va. Jan. 13, 2023).*
Potential defenses to a case plaintiff was arrested for do not nullify the probable cause. Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 865 (6th Cir. Jan. 11, 2023):
This anonymous tip of criminality of a probationer was shown to be reliable enough for reasonable suspicion. United States v. Rogers, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 786 (6th Cir. Jan. 11, 2023).
Defendant is accused of vandalizing the Anchorage Jewish Museum. Video inside shows him on his cell phone. Cell phone information could be sought by the government. United States v. Foster, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5388 (D. Alaska Jan. 11, 2023).*
Defendant doesn’t have standing to challenge the acquiring of location information from another person’s cell phone. United States v. Gordon, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235042 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 16, 2022).*
Posted inInformant hearsay, Standing|Comments Off on CA6: Anonymous tip shown reliable enough for probation search
Water heard running in the bathroom of a hotel room justified entry to avoid potential destruction of evidence. United States v. Hill, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 785 (6th Cir. Jan. 11, 2023).
Defendant’s Franks challenge doesn’t undermine the two critical facts that show probable cause for the warrant. United States v. Childers, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4260 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 11, 2023).*
A 22-day delay in getting a search warrant for a seized cell phone was not unreasonable. United States v. Hay, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4319 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 10, 2023).*
Traveling from one’s home to a hand-to-hand drug buy established nexus to the house. United States v. Randle, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4558 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 10, 2023).*
Bloomberg Law: Google Keyword-Search Warrants Questioned by Colorado Lawyers (“Lawyers for the arson case defendant maintain that Google must search billions of users to respond to keyword search warrants, raising privacy implications far beyond Colorado. ‘This is a really significant new legal issue with tremendous implications for not only Mr. Seymour but for everyone in the country who uses Google to run searches,’ said Michael Price, Litigation Director for the Fourth Amendment Center at National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, who represents Seymour.”)
Posted inComputer and cloud searches|Comments Off on Bloomberg: Google Keyword Search Warrants Questioned by Colorado Lawyers
Defendant’s refusal to show his hands when ordered to by the officer was not a seizure. United States v. Garner, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5400 (M.D. Pa. Jan. 11, 2023).*
Defendant’s stop was justified and it escalated to reasonable suspicion within 30 seconds because of his actions and the circumstances. United States v. Simmons, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5401 (M.D. Pa. Jan. 11, 2023).*
A dog sniff at an apartment door violated no reasonable expectation of privacy. That was settled in this circuit in 2022. “The Court finds that the corroborated information established that the CI was providing reliable information, and, in light of the totality of the circumstances described in the affidavit, the Court concludes that the information from the CI added to, rather than detracted from, the CI’s reliability and therefore also added to probable cause.” United States v. Navarrete-Rivera, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235214 (D. Minn. Nov. 21, 2022).*
Alleged new information about the search of defendant’s property doesn’t allege actual innocence and thus is not grounds for a successor habeas. In re Fisher, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 677 (6th Cir. Jan. 11, 2023).
2255 petitioner’s ineffectiveness claim on a search issue was properly denied. The issue he raised was within the issues decided by the district court before the direct appeal. Ochoa v. United States, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 474 (11th Cir. Jan. 9, 2023).*
A jail strip search case has to allege that the search was unreasonable and how. This fails that standard. Spencer v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5031 (M.D. Pa. Jan. 10, 2023).*
Defendant got a Franks hearing without an adequate showing, and the state didn’t object. So the court of appeals considers the showing at the hearing over the state’s objection, and defendant fails to show recklessness or intentional false statement or materiality. State v. Harbach, 2023 Iowa App. LEXIS 32 (Jan. 11, 2023).
Months earlier, a motorist found stopped on rural abandoned DoD land about midnight was approached by police and she admitted she was there to meet defendant for a drug deal. Her cell phone rang during the encounter and defendant’s name appeared on the screen, but he didn’t show. The officer made a point of checking the area during his midnight shifts, and finally encountered defendant and another woman seven months later. On the totality, the officer had reasonable suspicion for the encounter. United States v. Perry, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3193 (D. Haw. Jan. 9, 2023).*
There was an arrest warrant for defendant that justified his arrest. The court can take judicial notice of this fact from online court records without converting the motion to dismiss into one for summary judgment. One Eye El-Bey v. Sylvester, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3128 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 6, 2023).*
Defendant sought to cast his stop as pretextual and “driving while black,” but it’s rejected because the stop was objectively reasonable. “We conclude that while the officer’s actions placed Cyrus in a situation with an unarguable ‘moral and instinctive pressure[ ] to cooperate,’ Officer Morgan did not engage in conduct recognized by our courts as a coercive environment ‘significantly beyond that accepted in social intercourse’ constituting an illegal seizure. See Fogg, 936 N.W.2d at 670 (quoting 4 LaFave, Search and Seizure § 9.4(a), at 581-82). Therefore, we affirm the district court’s denial of Cyrus’s motion to suppress.” State v. Cyrus, 2023 Iowa App. LEXIS 37 (Jan. 11, 2023).
Corroboration of the CI’s innocent details makes the whole story more believable. Here, there was probable cause when coupled with a dog sniff. United States v. Rivera, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3961 (D. Minn. Jan. 10, 2023).*
This wasn’t a traffic stop; it was a felony stop based on probable cause. United States v. Gordon, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235042 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 16, 2022).*
Posted inInformant hearsay, Pretext|Comments Off on IA: “Driving while black” rejected because stop was objectively reasonable
A Terry stop is not necessarily custody for Miranda purposes. They can be, but they focus on different questions. United States v. Leggette, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 521 n.5 (4th Cir. Jan. 10, 2023).
Collective knowledge of the officers involved was probable cause for defendant’s vehicle search under the automobile exception. United States v. Nowell, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3143 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 6, 2023).*
In a traffic stop that revealed no occupant had a DL and the vehicle was stolen, the vehicle could be searched. (Anders brief.) United States v. Conley, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 491 (8th Cir. Jan. 10, 2023).*
Posted inCollective knowledge, Custody|Comments Off on CA4: Terry stop is not necessarily custody for Miranda purposes
There is no Sixth Amendment right for counsel to be present when a DNA sample is taken from defendant at the jail by warrant. United States v. Hubbard, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3661 (D.N.J. Jan. 9, 2023).
CBP had reasonable suspicion for a border search of defendant’s electronics because they developed information that he was exporting sensitive marine electronic equipment to China, which they then found in an extended warranted search of his equipment. United States v. Qin, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 430 (1st Cir. Jan. 9, 2023).
Even if the officer had been reckless in omission of the CI’s criminal history, defendant fails the materiality prong in his Franks challenge. United States v. Moreno, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3435 (D. Idaho Jan. 6, 2023).*
“However, an attempted arrest alone, even if unsupported by probable cause, is insufficient to invoke Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable seizures. See Hodari D., 499 U.S. at 626 (‘The word “seizure” … does not remotely apply … to the prospect of a policeman yelling “Stop, in the name of the law!” at a fleeing form that continues to flee.’). Instead, the Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful seizures attaches only when there is either ‘physical force,’ or, as relevant here, ‘submission to the assertion of authority.’ Id. (emphasis omitted).” United States v. Finley, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 381 (8th Cir. Jan. 9, 2023).
Reasonable suspicion of drug activity in a car is also reasonable suspicion firearms could be in the car, too. United States v. Moreno, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 426 (4th Cir. Jan. 9, 2023).
The issuing USMJ was presented with ample probable cause for the search warrant. United States v. Rodriguez-Preciado, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 427 (4th Cir. Jan. 9, 2023).*
“Here, a reasonable jury could find that Buonadonna intentionally or recklessly included material false statements and withheld material exculpatory information. Buonadonna admits that he read the protective order and knew that it did not bar communication between Klein and Salatas. Yet, he told the judge in his affidavit that the protective order ‘signed by a Judge and filed in open court’ forbade such communication. This was a bald misrepresentation. [¶] For his part, Buonadonna insists that he believed the order was incomplete because it conflicted with the information in the Indiana database and Salatas’s erroneous recollection of the order’s contents. But, as his counsel acknowledged, the information in the database is based upon the actual orders themselves. Thus, between an actual protective order and the database, a reasonable officer would know that the order controls.” Klein v. Town of Schererville, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 365 (7th Cir. Jan. 6, 2023).
2255 petitioner’s search claim fails for the reason already rejected on direct appeal: No standing. United States v. Sierra-Serrano, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2916 (D. Minn. Jan. 6, 2023).*
Blocking defendant’s car from behind was a seizure, and here it was with reasonable suspicion. “Considering the totality of the circumstances, including Sergeant Egan’s decades-long training and experience, along with the fact that the 911 call was placed by an identified eyewitness to a suspected felony in progress, we conclude that he had reasonable suspicion to initiate the stop of the Kia.” Commonwealth v. Muhammad, 2023 PA Super 6, 2023 Pa. Super. LEXIS 9 (Jan. 9, 2023).*
The trial court erred in suppressing evidence. The officers were lawfully on the premises with a warrant when a gun was seen in plain view. People v. Serrato, 2023 IL App (2d) 220100, 2023 Ill. App. LEXIS 3 (Jan. 6, 2023).*
Plaintiff didn’t state a civil claim for criminal assault in a jail, but he did for interference with legal mail, which wasn’t contested at this point. Johnson v. Ramsey Cty. ADC, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2290 (D. Minn. Jan. 6, 2023).*
“The totality of circumstances supports the Terry stop. Despite Moss’s contention, Sharkey did not rely merely on Moss matching the ‘generic’ descriptions in the BOLO as a basis for stopping him. … Sharkey observed Moss’s behavior, the surrounding circumstances, and the BOLO to justify the stop. As Sharkey articulates, factors such as the time of day, number of people on the street, officers’ response time, Moss’s behavior, and the BOLO all were considerations before stopping Moss. Under the totality of circumstances, Sharkey could have formed a reasonable suspicion that Moss was the armed man chasing the woman down Riopelle Street.” United States v. Moss, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2873 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 6, 2023).*
There is no suppression remedy for an unjustified no-knock warrant. United States v. Bryant, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 355 (5th Cir. Jan. 6, 2023).
Defendant didn’t enter a conditional plea, so his guilty plea waived his Fourth Amendment claim. United States v. Bogle, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 323 (6th Cir. Jan. 5, 2023).*
There was nexus and probable cause for this search warrant, and the good faith exception would apply in any event. United States v. Bigbee, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2288 (D. Minn. Jan. 6, 2023).*
There was a fair probability that criminal evidence would be found in defendant’s car, so the search was justified. State v. Hiatt, 323 Or. App. 607 (Jan. 5. 2023).*
The affidavits supporting the records warrant for defendant’s home did not establish nexus between his alleged drug activity, drug records, and his address. Also, the affidavit did not allege that defendant dealt drugs from the house or that he even entered the building just before or after the controlled buy. The affidavit did not establish that defendant was a known drug dealer, nor did it provide evidence of a large ongoing drug trafficking operation or recent, reliable evidence of drug activity. The motion to suppress should have been granted for lack of probable cause and no good faith exception. United States v. Grant, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 337 (6th Cir. Jan. 6, 2023).
Defendant’s motion for return of his electronics is denied. The government alleges it still has a need to investigate. United States v. Garg, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2189 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 3, 2023).*
Defendant’s stop was based on four traffic violations, three of which were captured by dashcam, and the officer narrated them on the video. Defendant fled in the car and threw something from the window. A protective search of the car was reasonable. State v. Johnson, 2023-Ohio-30, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 20 (6th Dist. Jan. 6, 2023).*
The prosecution established defendant interfered with a search by remotely wiping her cell phone and watch when she knew they were in the possession of CID and to be searched in a manslaughter investigation. United States v. Strong, 2023 CCA LEXIS 2 (Army Ct. Crim. App. Jan. 6, 2023) (en banc).
A lawyer was arrested for what he claimed was a false report of sexual misconduct involving a client. He sued the arresting officer claiming a Franks violation and failure to investigate. There was probable cause on the face of the arrest papers, and the Franks violation, if it was, wasn’t material. Newport v. Payton, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 282 (8th Cir. Jan. 6, 2023).* Law360: 8th Circ. Scraps Atty’s Federal Claims Against Police Officer by Emily Sawicki
Plaintiff stated a claim for being pepper sprayed for free speech, but he fails on causation because this defendant wasn’t around him. Laney v. City of St. Louis, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 281 (8th Cir. Jan. 6, 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.
