CA8: Ricocheting bullet not a seizure

Posted on January 13, 2026 by Hall

Unintended shooting target: “When an officer fires at a dog, is there a seizure of the dog’s owner when the stray bullet hits her instead? We conclude the answer is no.” Hight v. Williams,  2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 781 (8th Cir. Jan. 13, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Excessive force, Seizure | Comments Off on CA8: Ricocheting bullet not a seizure

E.D.N.C.: No REP in tent in homeless encampment that was trespassing on private property

Posted on January 13, 2026 by Hall

Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his tent in a homeless encampment on someone else’s private property. That’s “wrongful presence.” He also disclaimed the tent, but standing is enough to deny relief. United States v. Tillman, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5386 (E.D.N.C. Jan. 12, 2026).

The CI’s information recounted in the affidavit for warrant was sufficiently reliable for probable cause. “The confidential informant was an associate of the defendant who had the opportunity to observe the defendant’s illegal activities. The confidential informant told Paoletti that he or she had purchased drugs from the defendant and that the defendant was selling cocaine from his residence. The confidential informant provided a detailed description of the floor plan of the defendant’s residence, indicating that the defendant’s bedroom was on the second floor of the residence, on the ‘left hand side as one enters through the kitchen.’ Based on the confidential informant’s familiarity with the layout of the defendant’s residence, it was reasonable to infer that he or she had been inside the residence. The confidential informant also identified the specific type of firearm that the defendant had in his possession.” State v. Velazquez, 2026 Conn. App. LEXIS 17 (Jan. 13, 2026).* [Not even close.]

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Trespass | Comments Off on E.D.N.C.: No REP in tent in homeless encampment that was trespassing on private property

W.D.Pa.: SW for gun 11 days after a shooting wasn’t stale

Posted on January 13, 2026 by Hall

The search warrant for a gun involved in shooting was not stale 11 days after the shooting. Firearms are durable and not consumables. United States v. Williams, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4950 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 12, 2026).

The warrant for papers in defendant’s county jail cell was valid, seeking non-legal mail sent under cover of legal mail. Washington v. Kukowski, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5042 (E.D. Wis. Jan. 12, 2026).*

Petitioner’s plea agreement waived his search claims. Rit Tran v. United States, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5066 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 12, 2026).*

Defendant’s detention at the scene of execution of a warrant was reasonable under Summers, despite his argument to the contrary. United States v. Lombardi, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5125 (D.R.I. Jan. 12, 2026).*

Posted in Prison and jail searches, Staleness, Waiver, Warrant execution | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: SW for gun 11 days after a shooting wasn’t stale

D.Mass.: Cell site tower dump governed by Carpenter, but GFE applies here because there’s almost no case anywhere else

Posted on January 13, 2026 by Hall

A cell site tower dump to see who was there at the time of the crime is governed by Carpenter, but the law is completely unclear and the good faith exception saves it. United States v. McDonald, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5169 (D. Mass. Jan. 12, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Cell phones, Cell site location information | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Cell site tower dump governed by Carpenter, but GFE applies here because there’s almost no case anywhere else

D.Idaho: Ping information not stale

Posted on January 13, 2026 by Hall

The ping information warrant here was not stale. United States v. Torres, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4593 (D. Idaho Jan. 9, 2026). [It also seems like it would never get stale. It is information not subject to change; if anything, the data would be lost over time, and that’s not a staleness issue–it’s just gone.]

There was probable cause for issuance of the administrative warrant, and that permitted officers to pass by appellant’s no trespassing sign. Deitz v. Clerk of Courts of Shelby Cty., 2026-Ohio-63, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 55 (3d Dist. Jan. 12, 2026).*

The search warrant here did not include searching appellant’s wallet and seizing his bank card that led to further inquiries. The suppression order is affirmed. People v. Galloway, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 238 (Jan. 9, 2026)* (unpublished).

Defendant’s stop for riding a bicycle after sunset without lights was valid. United States v. Johnson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 726 (11th Cir. Jan. 12, 2026).*

Posted in Administrative search, Cell phones, Cell site location information, Pretext, Staleness | Comments Off on D.Idaho: Ping information not stale

AP: What to know about the warrants most immigration agents use to make arrests

Posted on January 13, 2026 by Hall

AP: What to know about the warrants most immigration agents use to make arrests by Safiyah Riddle and Valerie Gonzalez:

Continue reading →
Posted in Immigration arrests | Comments Off on AP: What to know about the warrants most immigration agents use to make arrests

E.D.Okla.: Def’s high speed chase was PC

Posted on January 12, 2026 by Hall

Defendant’s high speed chase was probable cause. “Defendant’s egregious eluding combined with his throwing an object from his vehicle combine to establish probable cause to search the Defendant’s vehicle under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.” United States v. Newman, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 270238 (E.D. Okla. Nov. 25, 2025).

Defendant filed two motions to suppress and withdrew them to instead prepare for trial. Finally, a third was filed out of time that alleges a Franks issue too. It would be appropriate to deny it all for untimeliness, but the court allows the Franks issue to be briefed. United States v. Phillips, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4571 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 9, 2026).*

The government has nothing that supports reasonable suspicion. Defendant was in a high crime area, but that alone is not enough. There was no particularized suspicion as to him. United States v. Talton, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4563 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 9, 2026).*

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Okla.: Def’s high speed chase was PC

CA6: Random and isolated interference with prisoner mail doesn’t state a claim

Posted on January 12, 2026 by Hall

Random and isolated interference with prisoner mail doesn’t state a claim for relief. Malicious interference would, but that’s not alleged. Tucker v. Horn, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 531 (6th Cir. Jan. 8, 2026).

Not search case, but defendant was suspected of robbery. He was arrested with three cell phones. Warrants were issued for the phones which revealed his location data, plans to rob the stores and then fence the goods. Malone v. State, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 173 (Tex. App. – Ft. Worth Jan. 8, 2026).*

Plaintiff can point to no case even close on whether this stalking arrest was without probable cause, and thus violated clearly established law. “Mulcahey has not pled allegations from which we can infer a lack of probable cause, and even if she did, she points to no caselaw showing the officers violated a clearly established right in these circumstances.” Mulcahey v. Twp. of Chocolay, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 666 (6th Cir. Jan. 8, 2026).*

Failure to allege an arrest was without probable cause is failure to state a claim. Tulis v. Bennett, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 672 (6th Cir. Jan. 9, 2026).*

Posted in Cell phones, Cell site location information, Prison and jail searches, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA6: Random and isolated interference with prisoner mail doesn’t state a claim

D.D.C.: A private tow didn’t violate US Capitol Police inventory policy or 4A

Posted on January 12, 2026 by Hall

The US Capitol Police inventory policy was followed here, and the motion to suppress is denied. The fact a private company towed the vehicle is of no moment to the policy or the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Johnson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4591 (D.D.C. Jan. 9, 2026).

“The temporal proximity and intervening-circumstances factors weigh heavily in Talton’s favor. As the record demonstrates, Fatching arrived on scene the morning of May 19, 2025, conducted the search shortly thereafter, seized the firearm, arrested Talton, and transported him to the Genesee County Jail. Sergeant Duhart interviewed Talton the next morning after he confirmed he was no longer under the influence of alcohol. A one-day delay between his unlawful arrest and confession, where he remained in custody the entire time and did not talk to a lawyer, favors suppression. … “Moreover, the record does not show ‘any meaningful intervening event’ between the illegal [search] and [Defendant’s] confession.’ Kaupp, 538 U.S. at 633 (quoting Taylor v. Alabama, 457 U.S. 687, 691 (1982)).” Therefore, considering the brief time between the illegal search and the confession and because ‘there was no intervening event of significance whatsoever,’ it is clear that Talton’s confession arose as a result of the illegal search and his subsequent arrest. Brown, 422 U.S. at 604. Talton’s confession will be suppressed.” United States v. Talton, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4563 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 9, 2026).*

Posted in Attenuation, Inventory | Comments Off on D.D.C.: A private tow didn’t violate US Capitol Police inventory policy or 4A

E.D.Ky.: DTF stop on interstate wasn’t pretextual when it was objectively reasonable for overtinting

Posted on January 12, 2026 by Hall

It doesn’t matter that DTF officers were on the interstate and ordered defendant’s stop for a window tint violation because there was objective justification for it. The rest of the stop was with reasonable suspicion for the drug dog. United States v. Jackson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 270126 (E.D. Ky. Dec. 18, 2025).*

This involves a warrant for a package sought by the Postal Inspectors executed the same day. The failure of the warrant to specify when it should be executed by, Rule 41 says in 14 days, doesn’t void the warrant. United States v. Odubajo, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3968 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 9, 2026).

No malicious prosecution claim for pretrial detention under a judicial order issued on probable cause. Besosa-Noceda v. Torres, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 319 (1st Cir. Jan. 7, 2026).*

The information as a whole shows probable cause. (The court alludes to Franks, but it’s not remotely an issue.) State v. Starkey, 2026-Ohio-42 (5th Dist. Jan. 8, 2026).*

Posted in Pretext, Probable cause, Reasonableness, Staleness, Warrant execution | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: DTF stop on interstate wasn’t pretextual when it was objectively reasonable for overtinting

D.S.D.: No standing in employer’s laptop

Posted on January 12, 2026 by Hall

2255 petitioner fails on standing to contest of search of this laptop. Based on all the court can see, including the PSR description, the laptop belonged to his employer, not him. All the electronic devices of the employer were seized. Sejnoha v. United States, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3711 (D.S.D. Jan. 5, 2026).

Petitioner’s guilty plea waived his search claim. Martinez-Rodriguez v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 269822 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 15, 2025).*

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to supervised release violation hearings. United States v. Davis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2381 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 7, 2026).*

The question in a probable cause for pretrial detention case is: excluding the alleged false information, is there still probable cause. If so, no Fourth Amendment violation. Blankenship v. Gray, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2342 (W.D. Wis. Jan. 6, 2026).*

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Probation / Parole search, Standing, Waiver | Comments Off on D.S.D.: No standing in employer’s laptop

E.D.Mich.: No standing in mobile home defendant burned down

Posted on January 11, 2026 by Hall

In direct appeal of his conviction, defendant was found not to have standing in the mobile home he burned because he no longer had any reasonable expectation of privacy in it. He’s Stoned out on habeas too. Sindone v. Miniard, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3689 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 8, 2026).*

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim for failing to file a motion to suppress a search clearly based on probable cause is rejected. State v. Paglinawan, 2026 N.M. App. LEXIS 2 (Jan. 9, 2026).*

Defendant was under investigation for drug trafficking with controlled buys. He was followed to a street mailbox outside a store and deposited packages. Officers opened the mailbox, retrieved the packages, and obtained search warrants for them, finding drugs. There was probable cause. The good faith exception applies. United States v. Brandstrom, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4103 (D. Minn. Jan. 9, 2026).*

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Mail and packages, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: No standing in mobile home defendant burned down

N.D.Iowa: Affidavit for SW could have been more explicit, but it still was good enough for PC

Posted on January 11, 2026 by Hall

The affidavit for warrant isn’t perfect but it’s good enough for the issuing magistrate to draw inferences. “Again, the affidavit could have been improved with explicit explanations of the ‘how’ and ‘why.’ But I do not fault an experienced judge for making the inferences necessary to find probable cause for this warrant.” The question is not actual probable cause; it’s whether there is a substantial basis to believe there is probable cause, and this satisfies that. United States v. Goodman, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4104 (N.D. Iowa Jan. 9, 2026).*

Defendant’s general allegations his warrantless arrest lacked probable cause was enough to deny a hearing. People v. Escobar, 2025 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 10237 (N.Y. Co. Dec. 19, 2025).*

Probable cause was shown for the warrant to draw defendant’s blood. State v. Chandler, 2026 Del. Super. LEXIS 13 (Jan. 9, 2026).*

The facts on the use of allegedly excessive force are in dispute, so there is no appellate jurisdiction of the qualified immunity question. Griffith v. Kattoula, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 663 (6th Cir. Jan. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Burden of pleading, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on N.D.Iowa: Affidavit for SW could have been more explicit, but it still was good enough for PC

DE: Judge issuing track and trace order didn’t have to recuse from trial

Posted on January 11, 2026 by Hall

The fact “the judge who presided over trial had signed a pen register or ‘track and trace’ warrant before [defendant’s] arrest” didn’t require recusal. The state court had already held issuing a search warrant didn’t require recusal either. Fayton v. State, 2026 Del. LEXIS 9 (Jan. 9, 2026).

There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop as a trespasser on hotel property. United States v. Harris, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 566 (4th Cir. Jan. 9, 2026).*

The fact two juvenile sex trafficking victims had different recollections of things doesn’t show a Franks violation. Also, “The mere fact that one of the victims had juvenile offenses would not have undercut the weight of probable cause from evidence like the Facebook messages, the prostitution ad, the online pictures of the victims, and the victims’ personal testimony. In short, the warrants’ ‘issuance did not hinge on [the] detail’ of these missing juvenile offenses.” Defendant also doesn’t show that the affiant even knew about them. United States v. Richards, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 583 (6th Cir. Jan. 9, 2026).*

Posted in Franks doctrine, Neutral and detached magistrate, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on DE: Judge issuing track and trace order didn’t have to recuse from trial

D.D.C.: A dozen officers involved in traffic stop slow walked it for drug dog

Posted on January 11, 2026 by Hall

A dozen officers purposely delayed the traffic stop for a dog sniff. “The Government has failed to show that police conducted this stop in a reasonably diligent manner. To the contrary, Officer Brennan’s decision to delegate all four warnings to a single officer—especially one who was unfamiliar with the process of writing D.C. tickets—was slow, inefficient, and not the least intrusive means of completing the stop reasonably available under the circumstances. At least a dozen officers were present. Officer Callahan testified that Officer Brennan would have been more efficient at writing D.C. tickets given his D.C. experience. … Yet the Government has offered no explanation for why it was reasonably diligent for a single inexperienced officer to handle all four warnings when a dozen officers were present.” United States v. Blackson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3457 (D.D.C. Jan. 8, 2026).

The dog sniff here was completed before the traffic tickets were done, so no Rodriguez violation. United States v. Corker, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 444 (11th Cir. Jan. 8, 2026).*

“Nor has Perdomo adequately alleged that the Officers conducted a false arrest or unreasonable seizure. The Fourth Amendment permits arrests supported by probable cause.” Perdomo v. City of League City, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 364 (5th Cir. Jan. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Dog sniff, Probable cause, Reasonableness | Comments Off on D.D.C.: A dozen officers involved in traffic stop slow walked it for drug dog

GA: REP against dog sniff at apartment door in gated complex where management let police in

Posted on January 10, 2026 by Hall

A dog sniff at defendant’s apartment door seams was unreasonable, despite it being in a common area of a gated apartment building [where the general public wasn’t allowed, but management let the police in]. State v. West, 2026 Ga. App. LEXIS 11 (Jan. 9, 2026). [Not much analysis here. The strongest argument is that the police had to be let in. Other tenants would be around, but not the public.]

The motion to suppress wasn’t timely and should be denied for that reason alone. On the merits anyway, it is denied because defendant’s gun was visible from outside the car, and the police could seize it under the community caretaking function. United States v. Bradley, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2741 (S.D. Ill. Jan. 7, 2026).*

“The body camera videos do not ‘blatantly contradict’ the district court’s findings that officers continued to use force after McCoy was subdued.” They get qualified immunity. Bruner v. Cassidy, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 413 (10th Cir. Jan. 8, 2026).*

Posted in Curtilage, Dog sniff, Plain view, feel, smell, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on GA: REP against dog sniff at apartment door in gated complex where management let police in

E.D.Cal.: Email seizure can be overbroad, but actual search has to be reasonably narrowed

Posted on January 10, 2026 by Hall

In digital information searches, overseizure to start is permitted to facilitate the process, but the review of all that information has to be limited, and here it was. United States v. Flores, 802 F.3d 1028, 1044 (9th Cir. 2015). United States v. Evanovich, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3637 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 7, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Digital Searches, E-mail, Overseizure | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Email seizure can be overbroad, but actual search has to be reasonably narrowed

D.Mass.: Late disclosed information provided Franks challenge

Posted on January 10, 2026 by Hall

How one defendant made a Franks challenge to get a hearing out of late disclosed information. United States v. Gonzalez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3229 (D. Mass. Jan. 8, 2026)*:

Continue reading →
Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Late disclosed information provided Franks challenge

D.Ariz.: No standing while violating order of protection

Posted on January 10, 2026 by Hall

Being inside the garage of this house in violation of an order of protection means no standing. Hernandez v. Chandler, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3096 (D. Ariz. Jan. 7, 2026).

The visual sweep of defendant’s car was just meticulous and wasn’t unusually or unreasonably prolonged while the tickets were being written. Thus, Rodriguez wasn’t violated. United States v. Bouldin, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1916 (E.D. Va. Jan. 6, 2026).*

The search warrant covered all of defendant’s vehicles, including the one he was driving when stopped. United States v. Quintero, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 302 (9th Cir. Jan. 7, 2026).*

The search warrant for the house permitted a search of defendant’s cabin on the curtilage connected to its water and electricity. The trial court erroneously suppressed, so reversed. State v. Dole, 2026 Ga. App. LEXIS 5 (Jan. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Scope of search, Standing | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: No standing while violating order of protection

CA9: RIPP restraint was seizure and no QI here

Posted on January 10, 2026 by Hall

Decedent died in a police car with an RIPP restraint bending him backwards. That’s a seizure, and the officers here do not get qualified immunity in the excessive force claim. Gonzalez v. City of Phx., 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 426 (9th Cir. Jan. 8, 2026).* From the syllabus, omitting concurrence:

Continue reading →
Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: RIPP restraint was seizure and no QI here