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).
Defendant signed a consent to search his computer hard drive to the US Army CID, but, once lawyered up, he effectively withdrew the consent a week later. The hard drive was searched after the withdrawal of consent, and the search is suppressed. McDonnell v. State, 2022 Md. App. LEXIS 852 (Dec. 1, 2022).
In this civil rights case, issues of fact remain for trial on whether the deputy prolonged the stop for a drug dog. Baxter v. Roberts, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33045 (11th Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*
The officer took defendant DUI suspect to the ER for a blood draw. He asked the nursing staff to wait while he got the implied consent form from the patrol car. When he got back, the blood draw was underway. This was all in good faith because there was at least probable cause for the blood draw and there was a warrant after the fact. People v. Schantz, 2022 IL App (5th) 200045, 2022 Ill. App. LEXIS 503 (Nov. 30, 2022).*
A parent fighting over custody had a drug testing condition, which she appealed. The brief is too muddled and confusing to determine the issue, and, as raised on appeal, it wasn’t presented below. In re A.P., 2022-Ohio-4295, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4039 (10th Dist. Dec. 1, 2022).*
No standing to challenge acquiring the CSLI of another’s cell phone. United States v. Lopez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215709 (E.D. Tenn. Oct. 24, 2022),* adopted, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214604 (E.D. Tenn. Nov. 29, 2022).*
Defendant’s guilty plea waived his Fourth Amendment claim. United States v. Sears, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33128 (10th Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*
Plaintiff claims he was falsely arrested for two rapes, but there was probable cause and arrest warrants, so his claim fails. Harper v. City of Phila., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33140 (3d Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*
Defendant got off a bus and into a waiting car, and the car was stopped because the owner was under a drug investigation. “Applying this principle, the trooper’s request [to get out of the car] was a reasonable precaution given the information known to the trooper at the time of the stop, the odor of marihuana and defendant’s ‘extremely nervous’ demeanor during the encounter …. We further note that at the time of the traffic stop, the underlying facts also provided probable cause for the trooper to search defendant ….” People v. Watford, 2022 NY Slip Op 06836, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6733 (3d Dept. Dec. 1, 2022).*
Plaintiff is the employer of people detained at a job site. Because their individual claims were small, the company sued for them. The third party standing claim under § 1983 fails, and the employer also admitted that the employees likely were better off financially because they were paid for their time of work. Rover Pipeline LLC v. Zwick, No. 22-3370, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33144 (6th Cir. Nov. 30, 2022):
There was exigency for CSLI. “Thus, this was not a standard criminal investigation seeking cell phone data; rather, this request sought to address an ongoing emergency because Carter was potentially armed and dangerous, had been involved in a violent crime only hours prior to the request, and left his co-conspirator for dead when he fled Hahn Village.” State v. Carter, 2022 S.C. App. LEXIS 125 (Nov. 30, 2022).
A shots fired call at a Wells Fargo location to 911 with a caller’s name and details, corroboration of details at the scene, and other suspicious actions of the car justified the stop. United States v. Washington, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214890 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 29, 2022).*
Defendant’s suppression hearing was before the state supreme court decided in 2020 that state law would no longer track the automobile exception. His preservation of that issue wasn’t preserved and won’t be decided. Commonwealth v. Arias, 2022 PA Super 202, 2022 Pa. Super. LEXIS 468 (Nov. 30, 2022).*
Evasiveness and the smell of marijuana coupled with a potentially injured person inside was exigency for a warrantless entry to evaluate. A warrant was finally issued a few hours later. United States v. Washington, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33024 (3d Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*
The court declines to decide the officers’ “hit and hold” entries where they entered without a warrant but under alleged exigency, secured the premises, and then sought a search warrant. Because there was independent justification for the warrantless search after the fact by consent before a warrant issued, there’s no need to decide whether the practice is legal. United States v. Alexander, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33020 (3d Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*
Defendant’s bad driving suggested DUI and that’s exigency. State v. Weemhoff, 2022-Ohio-4263, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4010 (5th Dist. Nov. 29, 2022).*
After defendant’s conviction, his firearms were no longer needed as evidence, and they can be returned to an intermediary, just not him. United States v. Vermilyea, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214770 (D. Ariz. Nov. 29, 2022).*
Defendant’s flight from the stop and dropping his cell phone was an abandonment. State v. Mills, 2022 Del. Super. LEXIS 1408 (Nov. 28, 2022).*
A District Court has no anomalous jurisdiction to bar the government from using evidence seized with a search warrant in an investigation. There are other remedies at the appropriate time. Trump v. United States. 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33296 (11th Cir. Dec. 1, 2022):
Requiring plaintiff, who said he was positive for Covid-19, be tested before putting him in hospital was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. It’s less intrusive than swabbing for DNA. Alternatively, qualified immunity applies. Mercado v. Columbus Reg’l Hosp., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214267 (S.D. Ind. Nov. 28, 2022).*
The officer tugging on defendant’s sleeve was not a seizure, and defendant then fled. United States v. Scott, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32887 (5th Cir. Nov. 29, 2022).*
“Start with whether the officers had probable cause to believe that Dunbar lived in unit 318. An officer testified that ‘confidential source information’ and ‘investigational measures’ led the task force to 2249 Elm Street. … After seeing a picture of Dunbar, the apartment managers confirmed that he resided in unit 318 and handed over a key to the unit. That created a fair probability Dunbar lived there. [¶] The officers also had probable cause to believe that they would find Dunbar inside. …” United States v. Dunbar, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32858 (6th Cir. Nov. 28, 2022).*
The video of this stop contradicted the district court’s findings, and the motion to suppress should have been granted. “Here, however, the video evidence does not support some of Officer Helms’s statements and impressions. As we explain, the district court clearly erred by crediting portions of Officer Helms’s testimony regarding whether Phillips was slow to stop and excessively nervous. These erroneous findings of fact ultimately led the district court to incorrectly find that Officer Helms possessed reasonable suspicion to extend the traffic stop.” The district court’s finding was clearly erroneous. United States v. Miller, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32834 (4th Cir. Nov. 29, 2022).
A 14-day delay for issuance of a search warrant for defendant’s cell phone was not unreasonable. Another 20 or so days for extraction was not unreasonable either. United States v. Vedrine, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32849 (11th Cir. Nov. 29, 2022).
“Several factual circumstances during the traffic stop contributed to a reasonable suspicion that Colbert was armed and dangerous: the odor of marijuana on his person, his delay in stopping and exiting his car, his hesitant and nervous behavior, and the bulge in his pant pocket. We examine whether each of these facts may be considered as part of the totality of the circumstances giving rise to a reasonable suspicion.” United States v. Colbert, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32857 (7th Cir. Nov. 29, 2022).*
The fire department arrived at a kitchen stove fire in an apartment building that was out. Informed of a sparking stove, fireman suspected there could be a fire in the basement. In the basement they found faulty wiring but no fire. The look in the basement was based on exigent circumstances. Cannarozzo v. Borough of W. Hazelton, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32804 (3d Cir. Nov. 29, 2022).
“But the totality of the circumstances—the anonymous tip, the ongoing emergency, the matching description, the high crime area, Moore’s attempt to evade the officers, and Moore’s refusals to remove his hands from his pockets—was enough for a reasonable and cautious officer in the officers’ shoes to conclude a crime had been committed and that Moore was ‘armed and dangerous.’” United States v. Moore, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213650 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 28, 2022).*
The information from the tipster was incomplete and not predictive or good enough to provide reasonable suspicion for the stop of defendant’s car. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Lacayo, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213646 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 28, 2022).*
“But statements about a deer-in-the-headlights facial expression are commonplace in caselaw assessing whether a police officer has articulable, reasonable suspicion to justify a stop under the Fourth Amendment. There are over a dozen federal appellate decisions, including an opinion from the Eighth Circuit, where this phrase is cited as a factor that supports the constitutionality of a stop or search. See, e.g., United States v. Orth, 873 F.3d 349, 352 (1st Cir. 2017); United States v. Hall, 193 Fed. Appx. 125, 127 (3d Cir. 2006); United States v. Mays, 643 F.3d 537, 542 (6th Cir. 2011); United States v. Patton, 705 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 2013); United States v. Hill, 1 Fed. Appx. 606, 608 (8th Cir. 2001); United States v. Jensen, 41 Fed. Appx. 346, 350 (10th Cir. 2002); United States v. Jones, 562 F.3d 768, 772 (6th Cir. 2008).” In re Short Call Substitute Teaching License in re Yanez, 2022 Minn. App. LEXIS 150 (Nov. 28, 2022).*
“We agree with the district court that Glasgow seized Dixon for Fourth Amendment purposes when he told Dixon and Montgomery to ‘hold up’ and go back inside the house for questioning because the record is clear they were not free to leave.” There was no probable cause on plaintiff’s version of the facts, so no qualified immunity. Dixon v. City of Birmingham, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32680 (11th Cir. Nov. 28, 2022).*
Officers grabbed at defendant in a raid of an “illegal speakeasy,” and he abandoned a gun. It was not yet an arrest. United States v. Burgess, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213300 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 28, 2022).*
“Ruiz argues that, because Carozzi lacked the statutory authority to arrest him outside the park, the arrest violated his Fourth Amendment rights, and therefore all evidence collected subsequent to his arrest (i.e., the breathalyzer results) must be suppressed. In the alternative, Ruiz argues that the court should exercise its supervisory power and suppress the evidence to disincentivize park rangers from making arrests beyond the park’s boundaries in the future. Neither of these arguments is availing, as described below.” Virginia v. Moore. United States v. Ruiz, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213110 (D. Mass. Nov. 25, 2022).
Defendant’s motion to suppress is denied as to probable cause for the search. A hearing will be set on whether a protective sweep was reasonable. United States v. Delira, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212944 (D. Neb. Nov. 8, 2022).*
“Mincy claims the search of his drawstring bag violated his Fourth Amendment rights. This is a close case. The government concedes it did not have a warrant to search that closed bag, but relies on two exceptions to the warrant requirement: a search-incident-to-arrest and an inventory search. As described below, the Court finds that the evidence supports the former exception, if barely. And thus, the Court need not consider the latter.” United States v. Mincy, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213007 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 23, 2022).*
Reason: The Federal Government’s Plan to Track Truckers’ Every Movement Is a Privacy Nightmare by Jared McCain (“This surveillance would be unconstitutional—and there’s no reason to believe it will make anyone safer.”) Would it be? NYC’s taxicabs lost this battle a while ago. Uber and Lyft track all their drivers. All cities with GPS on police cars track police cars. Is the only difference it’s only during work hours?
Posted inGPS / Tracking Data|Comments Off on Reason: The Federal Government’s Plan to Track Truckers’ Every Movement Is a Privacy Nightmare
There is probable cause to believe that there’s evidence of the crime in a stolen car. “It follows on this record that at a minimum there was also probable cause to believe that evidence of those suspected crimes (either car theft or knowing possession of a stolen car) would be located in the car. As the government points out, it stands to reason that there was a fair probability that evidence relevant to who owned the car and how Defendant came to be in possession of it would be found in the car itself.” (There is also the question of lack of standing in a stolen car not needed to be decided.) United States v. Allen, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212839 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 23, 2022).
Defendant’s consensual encounter escalated into an investigative detention. The court of appeals found it was not, and that court is reversed. The question of reasonable suspicion for the detention has not been decided, so remanded for that. Monjaras v. State, 2022 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 831 (Nov. 23, 2022) (5-4).*
“Viewed as a whole, the affidavit supporting the search warrant provided probable cause to authorize the search of Shostak’s car. First, officers independently corroborated much of the information given by the informant. The informant told officers that Shostak was selling drugs, driving a black Jaguar car, and known to frequent two addresses in Helena, Montana. Officers then established Shostak’s presence at one of the addresses and linked him with a black Jaguar car found at the address. Officers also confirmed with the registered owner of the Jaguar that he had recently sold the car to Shostak. Second, the information from the informant made up only a fraction of the details conveyed in the affidavit. …” United States v. Shostak, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32432 (9th Cir. Nov. 23, 2022).*
Posted inInformant hearsay, Probable cause|Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: There’s almost always PC in the contents of a stolen car, such as something of owner’s
"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.
