The description of the offending vehicle as a Harley in Wisconsin is so generic it can’t support a stop. “After all, Wisconsin is the home of Harley-Davidson, and it is one of, if not the most popular manufacturers of motorcycles in Wisconsin. Although reasonable suspicion is a low bar, it is not so low that it allows the State to stop so many otherwise law-abiding citizens based on such a generic description. … Additionally, although the circuit court found that it was ‘the beginning, very beginning, of [motorcycle] season,’ it also acknowledged that ‘[c]ertainly, people drive their bikes in April.’ [¶] That Richey’s Harley was spotted close to the location of the deputy’s call just five minutes later does not add much to the particularity of Officer Meier’s suspicions either.” State v. Richey, 2022 WI 106, 2022 Wisc. LEXIS 599 (Dec. 9, 2022).
Defendant’s motion to reopen the suppression hearing to put on more about the good faith exception is denied. What is tendered doesn’t matter. United States v. Wright, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222351 (S.D. Ga. Dec. 9, 2022).*
Arresting protestors who did not commit any offense states a claim for relief, and plaintiff pled enough to get over qualified immunity and 12(b)(6). Herrera v. Acevedo, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33981 (5th Cir. Dec. 9, 2022).*
Defendant’s release condition of a firearm restriction and Fourth Amendment waiver because of a prior misdemeanor firearms conviction doesn’t violate the Second Amendment under New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022). Heller supports the court’s conclusion. United States v. Fencl, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220973 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 7, 2022).
The stop started with a partial and reasonable mistake of fact, but real reasonable suspicion developed thereafter. United States v. Barrow, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222085 (N.D. Tex. Dec. 8, 2022).*
“‘Either “direct observation” or “normal inferences” can support’ that officers objectively could reasonably believe that drugs were located in Thompson’s residence. … The affidavit set forth a confidential tip based off personal observation of large quantities of drugs and bulk currency that were seen on several occasions, an independent investigation by law enforcement that corroborated a number of facts, as well as a traffic stop that resulted in the discovery of marijuana. Officer Drace acted in objectively reasonable good-faith reliance upon the search warrant because the supporting affidavit was not ‘so lacking in indicia of probable cause to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable.’” United States v. Thompson, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222094 (S.D. Miss. Dec. 9, 2022).*
The Washington State Department of Labor and Industries received information from whistleblowers of cell site location information the defendant business collected to show alleged violations of state law. This was a private search, and Carpenter is not implicated. Kleiser v. Chavez, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33918 (9th Cir. Dec. 9, 2022).
The search warrant was executed in good faith. It was the same as a prior affidavit for warrant, and it was based on the same facts as the complaint for defendant’s arrest. United States v. Carrasco, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221931 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 8, 2022).*
The FBI’s standardized procedure for vehicle inventory was testified to. The fact one form was used for two purposes doesn’t matter. There is no showing of an investigative motive for the search. United States v. Farah, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221984 (D. Minn. Dec. 9, 2022).*
Defendants are corporate officials of a business that was searched. That fact alone doesn’t give them standing, and the motion papers don’t really help. This is a search under a warrant, and the defendants carry the burden on standing and haven’t yet satisfied it. Argument will be scheduled on the standing question. United States v. Schampers, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222066 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 9, 2022)*:
“A probable cause affidavit supporting a cell phone search must contain evidence of the requisite nexus with more than mere conclusory allegations. For example, the Court of Criminal Appeals recently held that generic, boilerplate language about cell phone use among criminals is not alone sufficient to establish probable cause to search a cell phone.” Baldwin v. State, 2022 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 321 (May 11, 2022). No probable cause is shown here. Stocker v. State, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 8983 (Tex. App. – 14th Dist. (Houston) Dec. 8, 2022).
The search warrant here sought electronically stored evidence of sex crimes against two adult women. The fact the information for one was three months old didn’t make it stale because there was a reasonable inference that the SD card of the camera had been wiped clean, suggesting the data had been moved to other storage devices and kept. People v. Haas, 2022 NY Slip Op 06960, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6832 (3d Dept. Dec. 8, 2022).
Defendant’s “reverse Franks” claim that material omissions would have precluded finding probable cause fails. There would have been anyway. State v. Gibson, 2022 Del. Super. LEXIS 1422 (Dec. 5, 2022).*
The mistake of law “defense” to an illegal search or seizure applies to the scope of the law, not whether it even exists. Here, it didn’t. White v. State, 2022 Ind. App. LEXIS 390 (Dec. 8, 2022).
The specific characteristics and description of defendant’s truck as matching the truck involved in a shooting incident a day or two before in the same area was reasonable suspicion for this stop. People v. Patton, 2022 IL App (4th) 210561, 2022 Ill. App. LEXIS 533 (Dec. 8, 2022).*
“We conclude that the motion court correctly determined that Jandreau’s arguments regarding overbreadth and lack of particularity in the September 2017 [cell phone] warrant were raised perfunctorily but never developed.” State v. Jandreau, 2022 ME 59, 2022 Me. LEXIS 61 (Dec. 6, 2022).*
Opening the car door was not for the purpose of searching; it was to secure the uncooperative defendant. During the interaction, evidence in plain view was seen and the officer then could enter the car to secure it. State v. Jackson, 2022-Ohio-4365, 2022 Ohio LEXIS 2469 (Dec. 8, 2022).
Defendant had standing to challenge a dog sniff and search of a package he admitted he sent. The sender was listed as “D. McCarley.” It was not as fictitious a name as the government makes it out to be. He had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the package. United States v. McCarley-Connin, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220092 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 1, 2022).
Removal of plaintiff’s child from the home without adequate justification violated the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, the right was clearly established, and the official gets no qualified immunity. McMurry v. Brunner, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33724 (5th Cir. Dec. 7, 2022).*
Because the automobile exception applies, inevitable discovery does not have to be decided. United States v. Carter, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220613 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 7, 2022).*
After defendant’s motion to suppress was denied, the government alerted the court and defense to an internal investigation of the state trooper involved just concluded where 43 instances of violation of policy and procedure were documented. The search here turned on officer credibility and the community caretaking function. On reconsideration, the court finds the officer not believable and not acting as a legitimate community caretaker in seizing defendant’s car. United States v. Soto-Lopez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220466 (D. Alaska Oct. 14, 2022).
There was probable cause from three controlled buys and the police determining that defendant would likely have drugs in the car the day they stopped him. United States v. Febles, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219268 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 6, 2022).*
On a sentencing issue, the officers had authority to open a safe with a key from another person. The contents were linked to defendant, and the search of the safe was within the warrant’s scope. Harcrow v. United States, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220471 (W.D. Ark. Nov. 18, 2022).*
Defendant sought search warrant materials presented to the grand jury. Denied because of grand jury secrecy. Sculti v. Finley, 2022 NY Slip Op 06950, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6820 (2d Dept. Dec. 7, 2022).
Defendant had no standing in the common area of an apartment building basement. United States v. Cepeda, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220317 (D. Conn. Dec. 6, 2022).*
There was probable cause by information from an identified CI who provided detailed and self-incriminating information about drug transactions in defendant’s house. United States v. Gamble, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33680 (6th Cir. Dec. 6, 2022).*
Defense counsel was not ineffective for not challenging a search that had “little or no chance of success.” People v. O’Sullivan, 2022 NY Slip Op 06944, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6768 (2d Dept. Dec. 7, 2022).*
This is a subrogation claim over a fire caused by arson. Padilla was convicted. The civil case resulted in getting discovery of the DA’s file. After that, the name of a CI for a search warrant was sought, and it was ordered released. That order was appealed. The CI’s name isn’t even important to the case, and the balancing of interests protects the informant’s identity. Reversed. Am. Zurich Ins. Co. v. Meridia Downtown Urban Renewal Bound Brook, 2022 N.J. Super. LEXIS 141 (App. Div. Dec. 7, 2022).
A shooting call in a domestic disturbance led to a valid exigent entry into the home to look for potential victims and all persons had not been accounted for. Blood was seen in plain view. State v. Hernandez, 2022 Mo. App. LEXIS 772 (Dec. 6, 2022).*
There was confusion here whether a prior probation sentence with no reasonable suspicion condition or a current one with a reasonable suspicion applied. This required reasonable suspicion and the officers had it. The government also relied on consent, but they failed to prove it. Expecting consent from the past and actually getting it are different things. United States v. Palmore, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220160 (M.D. Ga. Dec. 6, 2022).*
Here, the government got a search warrant for information from Google over who placed a Google voice call. United States v. Alford, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219552 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 8, 2022),* adopted, CoA denied, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218090 (N.D. Fla. Dec. 3, 2022).*
Defendant’s specific violation of privacy challenge by the state changed between the trial court and the appeal, and it would not be considered. State v. Rogers, 2022-NCCOA-828, 2022 N.C. App. LEXIS 810 (Dec. 6, 2022) (unpublished).*
Defendant litigated his search claim in state court and appealed. He can’t revise the issue and raise it again as in habeas when he already had the “full and fair opportunity” to litigate it. United States v. Bennett, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218932 (D. Mont. Dec. 5, 2022).*
The search of defendant’s car was without his consent, but, based on the suppression hearing testimony, valid as an inventory. United States v. Thompson, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218936 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2022).*
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on N.D.Fla.: SW used to get caller information on Google Voice call
The parole search of a car’s glove compartment because of a parolee backseat passenger was unreasonable. Because the glove compartment was locked, it wasn’t possible for the key in the ignition to be used to unlock it while the vehicle was moving and that would have required all three occupants to be involved, and the police would have noticed that, if it happened, which it didn’t. Claypool v. Superior Court, 2022 Cal. App. LEXIS 996 (3d Dist. Dec. 6, 2022).*
“Consensual encounters [with the police] can quickly transform into investigatory detentions. That is what happened here.” And that was based on reasonable suspicion. United States v. Germany, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218005 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 2, 2022).*
When an LPN check shows the owner’s DL is suspended it can be a logical inference that the owner is the driver. Here, the owner was a passenger. That ripened into a DUI stop. State v. Compton, 2022-Ohio-4324, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4074 (9th Dist. Dec. 5, 2022).*
The fact legal hemp and marijuana may smell the same doesn’t undermine probable cause for search based on smell. State v. Tillman, 2022-Ohio-4341, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4085 (5th Dist. Dec. 5, 2022).*
An All Writs Act proceeding by the government to track someone in real time back in 2020 is a judicial record subject to the common law right of disclosure of court records. In re Forbes Media LLC, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218139 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 2, 2022).
Officer’s failure to consider exculpatory evidence before getting an arrest warrant can create a jury question on whether the officer really believed he had probable cause for arrest. Hart v. Collins, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217898 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 2, 2022).*
“[W]hile the exclusionary rule does not apply to revocation proceedings, the exclusion of evidence obtained as a result of harassment or in a particularly offensive manner is required.” State v. Sarkissian, 2022 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 518 (Dec. 2, 2022) (recognizing rule).
A reformulated search and seizure claim based on alleged newly discovered evidence isn’t ground for a successor habeas. In re Jackson, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33356 (11th Cir. Dec. 2, 2022).*
The government is not responsible when a subpoenaed party turns over more than was sought. United States v. Taylor, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33418 (4th Cir. Dec. 5, 2022).
Officers executing a search warrant at defendant’s house repeatedly made it clear he was not under arrest and free to leave but they wanted to talk to him. He did, and his statement was admissible against him. It was not a custodial interrogation. United States v. Mastroianni, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217761 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 2, 2022).*
Defendant’s admission during execution of a drug search warrant that 90% of his Bitcoin account was drug proceeds leads to its forfeiture. United States v. 15.23927797 Bitcoin, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217826 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2022).*
“‘[T]he Fourth Amendment does not apply to activities of the United Statesagainst aliens in international waters.’” United States v. Diaz-Jaramillo, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217862 (D.P.R. Dec. 2, 2022).
Grid News: Can police use facial recognition as probable cause? Probably not, but some are doing it anyway (“A new report from the Georgetown Center for Privacy Technology argues that facial recognition has serious flaws that make it unreliable for use in investigations, in sharp contrast to proponents’ claims that facial recognition removes human bias from the process of identifying suspects.”)
Posted inProbable cause|Comments Off on Grid News: Can police use facial recognition as probable cause? Probably not, but some are doing it anyway
Defendant’s argument that the probation search statute wasn’t followed doesn’t require exclusion. That’s for constitutional violations. State v. Clardy, 2022-Ohio-4300, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4070 (1st Dist. Dec. 2, 2022); State v. Kellett, 2022-Ohio-4340, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4088 (5th Dist. Dec. 5, 2022).
Defendant allegedly stole a computer from his former employer and tried to sell it on eBay. They reported it to the police who got a search warrant for defendant’s place. A representative of the employer was there for the search and identified their computer open on the bed. The officer touched the mousepad and child porn came up. The computer was seized and more child pornography was found. The plea was unconditional, so he couldn’t appeal. United States v. Powell, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33275 (6th Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*
Defendant’s argument that the officer’s testimony didn’t add up to reasonable suspicion is based on a credibility argument. There was reasonable suspicion on the totality. United States v. Pierre, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217512 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 21, 2022).*
The trial court erred in suppressing the search of defendant’s automobile repair business which was a pervasively regulated business. The search was during the work week during regular hours and was for evidence of compliance with the Motor Vehicle Service and Repair Act. The searches of other cars on the premises were reasonable, too. People v. Vaughn, 2022 Mich. App. LEXIS 7017 (Dec. 1, 2022).
A child porn defendant properly had a computer search condition imposed on him during seven years of supervised release. United States v. Sigala-Salazar, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33308 (9th Cir. Dec. 2, 2022).*
There was reasonable suspicion for the stop of defendant’s vehicle, for different reasons than given by the USMJ. United States v. Williams, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217280 (D. Minn. Dec. 2, 2022).*
The CI’s correct predictive information was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop. United States v. Chandler, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33297 (6th Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*
Defendant had no standing to contest installation of a GPS by the CS in the vehicle he loaned to defendant. Jones specifically recognized this. United States v. Dewilfond, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33273 (8th Cir. Dec. 2, 2022).
Defendant was a passenger in a vehicle stopped, and he had no right of control or access to it, no reasonable expectation of privacy, and thus no standing. There was reasonable suspicion for the stop on two-day-old information about a robbery where almost everything matched up with the vehicle and occupants. (The only thing that didn’t was the robber had no shirt on.) United States v. Scott, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217114 (D. Minn. Nov. 9, 2022).*
Defense counsel didn’t move to suppress text messages but succeeded in getting some excluded at trial. Defendant doesn’t show what basis there was to suppress them or that it would have been granted or would have changed the outcome of the trial. State v. Harris, 2022 Del. Super. LEXIS 1411 (Nov. 28, 2022).*
Defendant was on state parole living with his girlfriend, also a defendant. They were out and her mother was their babysitter in the home. Parole came by for a compliance check. The mother let them in. First, the search was valid under the totality of the circumstances under Samson. Second is consent; mom was not just any babysitter. She was there several times a week. United States v. Abraham, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 216691 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 1, 2022).
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a contraband cell phone in prison or the calls it makes. United States v. Yandell, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 216703 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2022).*
It was reasonable to order the driver and passenger out of the car in a stop, and that led to a valid plain view. Suppression reversed. State v. Kildow, 2022 Ida. App. LEXIS 20 (Dec. 1, 2022).*
To the officers, the facts presented added up to a burglary in progress, and that justified a warrantless entry. United States v. Chavez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 216541 (D.N.M. Dec. 1, 2022).*
A dog sniff outside a hotel room door was reasonable under the state constitution. (And, while other information was illegally gathered, this was enough for the warrant.) Crabtree v. State, 2022 Ind. App. LEXIS 385 (Dec. 1, 2022).
Excessive force in a school is found the same as the general rule looking to T.L.O. and Graham. J.I.W. v. Dorminey, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33203 (11th Cir. Dec. 1, 2022).
Defendant’s guilty plea “was a complete admission of guilt” and waived his suppression issues. State v. Kirkman, 2022-Ohio-4229, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4043 (3d Dist. Nov. 28, 2022).*
“Accordingly, when Trooper Gurney learned that the registered owner of the vehicle, Simanton, had an active warrant, under Bromgard, the active warrant was enough for Trooper Gurney to stop the vehicle if it was reasonable to believe Simanton was in the vehicle. Pursuant to Glover, it was reasonable for Trooper Gurney to infer Simanton would be driving his own vehicle. As such, Trooper Gurney conducted a valid traffic stop of Simanton based on Simanton’s active warrant. The district court erred by finding there was not reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop.” State v. Simanton, 2022 Ida. App. LEXIS 19 (Dec. 1, 2022).
"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.
